XP SP3 Details?

[student]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

It would depend on the "few" bugs wouldn't it? like a report that
doesn't get printed because garbage was coming out of the printer
for that person on the lan printer? especially the report was for
the supervisor.....

ms support say reload the driver which was already done; ms support
say that there is a virus; user say text only files can get printed
just word docs produce garbage. ms suport say call you back later
& is never here from again.

A few bugs? I do hope windows isn't ever used on planes or control
equipment in hospitals. The os isn't ready to do the things that
ms claims if bugs & unreliability are acceptable.

I now shudder that I heard in the news that it is intended to
have windows running some stuff in cars.......the "accidents"
happened, be reasonable, there are million lines of code in
windows, whats a few bugs...


On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
> If indeed you were a programmer particularly a micro-programmer then you
> should have enough experience to recognize the complexity of an operating
> system plus all the micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were in
> development you would know that regardless of the amount of testing some
> bugs will show up after release. How can you possibly be so critical of a
> few bugs? Compare today's PC's with those of just a few years ago. Be
> objective not emotional.
> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>> ...
>>
>>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
>>> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
>>> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
>>> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>>
>> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough,
>> all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS,
>> that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't
>> mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they
>> have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have
>> a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those
>> who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK,
>> reverse engineering of several versions of the major components
>> of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages
>> of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS
>> like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its
>> copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers.
>>
>> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that
>> naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and
>> misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all
>> kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC,
>> they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush
>> to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super
>> competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange
>> bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full
>> diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively
>> difficult.
>>
>> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more
>> than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak,
>> but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of
>> improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating.
>> I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say
>> that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent
>> claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for
>> listening.
>>
>>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>> jour ...
>>>>
>>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>>> programs.
>>>>
>>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>>>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>>>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is
>>>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices
>>>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than
>>>> good most of the time.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> HP, aka Jerry
>
>

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

student added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> ms word has a bad problem with grammar. One of my professors
> told the class that she should go on the "warpath" & mark an
> "F" for the paper for the errror in basic grammar. She was
> stopped only because a student told her that it is word & one
> could not change it to be correct as word will override &
> impose the bad grammatical error. The professor said she
> learned to turn off word's grammar & spell checking.

One BIG thing is that Word likes active voice grammar, not
passive as usually used in business letters and technical
reports. I find the grammar checker to be completely useless, but
the spell checker is quite good.

> A former co-worker once asked how he can stop word from
> putting mis-spelling on his report as word won't allow any
> changes to correct ms crap.
>
> For the os, when ms was officially "supporting" their products
> on both compuserve & genie in the early 1990's, I had a
> problem with drive letters on both my home & work computers;
> they were running os/2 & nt. Everything was working until the
> computers were booted up one day; it wasn't either a virus or
> trojan. ms claimed that my partition setup was wrong & sent a
> "white paper" showing how I should partition the drive; I
> replied on compuserve that the doc shows exactly how my drive
> partition were done. NO MORE replies from m$. Shortly ms
> announced they wer abandoning support on compuserve & genie &
> do their "support" on the usenet/internet newsgroups.
>
> A "mvp" claimed that the newsgroups were always done by
> "volunteers"; I don't think many of them were ever involved
> with ms on either genie or compuserve to know any better.
>
> Regarding the drive letter errors, a long(?) time later, I got
> an email from the people who do the ms backup software at that
> time; don't remember the name as they have changed it but
> still in the ms os releases. The email doc show how they
> encountered & found that the problem was install process
> whereby the drive had to load into a dos partition then
> reformat/reconfure into fat32 or ntfs (more likely fat32).
>
> I tried to keep the doc, but it got "losted" during one of the
> ms os crashes.......
>
> Regarding the ms word, a couple of years ago, someone in
> alt.usage.english said that there was a website that had
> listings of grammar & spelling problems with word; I never
> checked as have decided to stay with wordperfect mainly for
> the "reveal codes" where I am able to "fix" things, hopefully.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

student added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> It would depend on the "few" bugs wouldn't it? like a report
> that doesn't get printed because garbage was coming out of the
> printer for that person on the lan printer? especially the
> report was for the supervisor.....
>
> ms support say reload the driver which was already done; ms
> support say that there is a virus; user say text only files
> can get printed just word docs produce garbage. ms suport say
> call you back later & is never here from again.
>
> A few bugs? I do hope windows isn't ever used on planes or
> control equipment in hospitals. The os isn't ready to do the
> things that ms claims if bugs & unreliability are acceptable.
>
> I now shudder that I heard in the news that it is intended to
> have windows running some stuff in cars.......the "accidents"
> happened, be reasonable, there are million lines of code in
> windows, whats a few bugs...
>
A sophisticated modern car with lots of options/features may have
25 computers, sometimes more, all talking to each other over what
amounts to be a LAN (not really, more like multi-plexed wiring,
but a fair analogy). However, unlike a normal O/S or app, which
must run on hundreds of old, fair, and new HW and with all sorts
of legacy crap, car computers are 100% self-contained and the
programmers ARE allowed to talk to each other.

I do not know the exact number of lines of code in a modern car,
but when I retired, I had a subordinate who was the patent holder
(assign) for Chrysler's ignition key security. He believed it was
in the 10s of millions back in 2001. Of course, car software from
engine/trans controllers to simple power window switch
controllers, are actually expected by customers AND the
government testing agencies to last 10 years, 100,000 miles, and
so are VERY rigorously tested. Ditto for expectatins of
everything working in harmony from about 80 deg. below zero F to
150 deg, in dry, humid, driving rain, sleet, and blizzard snow
conditions, and work well every time you unlock the door and
start the car. And, they do a pretty fair job of it.

However, bugs and not-so-nice features DO happen. I had an
interesting one on a 2006 Jeep Liberty company lease car. The
battery kept going dead because my wife is a short-distance
driver and never really charged the battery enough. That one
turned out to be a VERY minor bug in the gigantic body systems
computer that was telling the batter to supply current to all the
accessories in the car except the ignition and starter, so a
fairly high amperage was always flowing. The Jeeps affected by
this "bug" were all VOLUNTARILY recalled, the body computer chip
(s) flashed or EPROM'd, whichever, and the problem was solved.

I is a distant dream, but Bill Gates still comes to Detroit every
year, hat in hand, trying to convince the car makers to use his
stuff more in their cars. There IS more in Detroit than just the
Detroit Three, BTW, the Asians and Europeans have small R & D
centers here. Support for what would've been considered unheard
of features in cars IS coming, e.g., MP3 players, iPod support,
Blackberry support, and the like, but the car makers are pretty
loathe to let Windows itself in their cars because they have no
control over it and don't trust MS to keep it running. Remember
that you cannot pull over and "reboot" if a car computer or
accessory computer dies.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Tom Willett]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing different
tentative release periods.

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com...
| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett"
| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:
|
| >
| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H CY2008.
| > | This date is preliminary."
| > |
| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
| >
| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3.
|
|
| No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced no dates.
| Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan" indicate that these are
| rough estimates, not promises.
|
| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or change it,
| that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing an estimate is not.
|
|
| > And, they
| > always say it's preliminary ;-)
|
|
| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that when the
| date is far enough in the future that they are unsure of it. When they
| are closer to a release date and feel assured of making it, *then*
| they will announce a date.
|
|
| --
| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
| Please Reply to the Newsgroup

 

[ben]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

HEMI-Powered wrote:
> I agree with you about not getting enthralled with the next MS
> compendium of fixes. First, MS's long track record of really bad
> releases of not only individual patches but SPs has taught me to
> be VERY wary of being the first kid on the block to install the
> latest and greatest. e.g., I waited over a year after SP2 to be
> sure that the early adopters were happy. While I obviously do not
> think SP3 will be that big a deal as you say, there is still a
> STRONG likelihood of a major blow-down upon install, especially
> if it includes IE7. I say that because I have declined to install
> maybe 10-15% of today's SP2 critical updates after lurking for
> awhile in these many MS NGs and seeing that those with auto
> update turned on had grievous problems. And, I have a strong
> philosophy of not trying to fix things that aren't broken, so if
> I think I've gotten the updates I need/want - and I do think that
> - then in all likelihood I will simply acquire SP3 but not
> install it on my present PC.

My PC is about 3 years old now with autoupdate on and have never had any
problems due to autoupdate.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

ben added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

> HEMI-Powered wrote:
>> I agree with you about not getting enthralled with the next
>> MS compendium of fixes. First, MS's long track record of
>> really bad releases of not only individual patches but SPs
>> has taught me to be VERY wary of being the first kid on the
>> block to install the latest and greatest. e.g., I waited over
>> a year after SP2 to be sure that the early adopters were
>> happy. While I obviously do not think SP3 will be that big a
>> deal as you say, there is still a STRONG likelihood of a
>> major blow-down upon install, especially if it includes IE7.
>> I say that because I have declined to install maybe 10-15% of
>> today's SP2 critical updates after lurking for awhile in
>> these many MS NGs and seeing that those with auto update
>> turned on had grievous problems. And, I have a strong
>> philosophy of not trying to fix things that aren't broken, so
>> if I think I've gotten the updates I need/want - and I do
>> think that - then in all likelihood I will simply acquire SP3
>> but not install it on my present PC.
>
> My PC is about 3 years old now with autoupdate on and have
> never had any problems due to autoupdate.
>
Ben, I do not dispute the personal testimony of people, but MY
experience personally, whilst managing PC support people for 15
years, knowing many technies AND listening to extreme tails of
woe from people who literally went to bed with a fully functional
PC and woke up to toast. So, please do what you think best and
allow others, like myself, who take a more cautious approach. I
do NOT let ANY SW or ANY device, including such simple things as
my cell phone from auto-updating ANYthing. You know my two
mottons on this: "don't try to fix things that aren't broken" and
"never give Murphy an even break.

I'll leave you with one super example of this. Countless people
on these several support NGs as well as graphics app NGs such as
Corel moan, groan and complain about blindly downloading the
latest nVidia card drivers and completely destroying their
systems, sometimes to the point of needing a nuke and reinstall
of the whole shebang. nVidia, in this extreme example, is
INfamous for releasing bugging, very unreliable driver updates,
which is why I stopped buying their video cards 2 PCs ago and
went with ATI.

Good luck, I think you're going to need it - eventually.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Bob I]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Let me get this straight, you bollixed up your partitions 15 years ago,
and STILL haven't gotten over it!?!?!?!?!? Actually you are the one that
has a problem with grammar, and it sounds like your co-worker apparently
couldn't find a menu selection if his life depended on it. This smells
like a troll rant to me, "losted" indeed!

student wrote:

> ms word has a bad problem with grammar. One of my professors told the
> class that she should go on the "warpath" & mark an "F" for the paper
> for the errror in basic grammar. She was stopped only because a student
> told her that it is word & one could not change it to be correct as
> word will override & impose the bad grammatical error. The professor
> said she learned to turn off word's grammar & spell checking.
>
> A former co-worker once asked how he can stop word from putting
> mis-spelling on his report as word won't allow any changes to correct
> ms crap.
>
> For the os, when ms was officially "supporting" their products on both
> compuserve & genie in the early 1990's, I had a problem with drive
> letters on both my home & work computers; they were running os/2 & nt.
> Everything was working until the computers were booted up one day;
> it wasn't either a virus or trojan. ms claimed that my partition
> setup was wrong & sent a "white paper" showing how I should partition
> the drive; I replied on compuserve that the doc shows exactly how
> my drive partition were done. NO MORE replies from m$. Shortly ms
> announced they wer abandoning support on compuserve & genie & do
> their "support" on the usenet/internet newsgroups.
>
> A "mvp" claimed that the newsgroups were always done by "volunteers";
> I don't think many of them were ever involved with ms on either genie
> or compuserve to know any better.
>
> Regarding the drive letter errors, a long(?) time later, I got an email
> from the people who do the ms backup software at that time; don't
> remember the name as they have changed it but still in the ms
> os releases. The email doc show how they encountered & found that the
> problem was install process whereby the drive had to load into a dos
> partition then reformat/reconfure into fat32 or ntfs (more likely fat32).
>
> I tried to keep the doc, but it got "losted" during one of the ms
> os crashes.......
>
> Regarding the ms word, a couple of years ago, someone in alt.usage.english
> said that there was a website that had listings of grammar & spelling
> problems with word; I never checked as have decided to stay with
> wordperfect mainly for the "reveal codes" where I am able to "fix" things,
> hopefully.
>
>
>
>
> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>
>>Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of significant size has
>>them. However MS fixes theirs instead of blaming others. Did you ever write
>>an error free program?
>>"student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message
>>news:slrnfc437c.3ot.guest@crane.li-po.edu...
>>
>>>ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app?
>>>
>>>
>>>On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you
>>>>control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write
>>>>programs
>>>>to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately
>>>>blamed. Be objective.
>>>>"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>>>news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>>
>>>>>Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>>>>>...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>>>>amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>>>>programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>>>>programs.
>>>>>
>>>>>That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips
>>>>>body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball
>>>>>or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that
>>>>>reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise
>>>>>good system and are more harm than good most of the time.
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>HP, aka Jerry
>>>>
>>>>
>>

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

> I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing
> different tentative release periods.

Tom, please keep this in mind. First, there is NO reason on God's
Green Earth to be lusting after SP3, no matter WHAT it has in it.
Quite the contrary, you should be wary and cautious to the point
of being frightened of the prospect if you intend to be an early
adopter. I am NOT saying that MS EVER intentionally screws up,
but they DO occasionally mess up a critical update or some other
update. Hopefully, by the time an SP is put together, they've
ascertained whatever the problem is and fixed it, or they may
have simply ignored it if the number of bad reports is small.

As to multiple dates on the web site, so what?! I'm not whacking
on you, Tom, or anyone, but I just do not see the burning need to
know a firm date. It isn't like you're going to drop dead of
cancer the next day if you don't download it and immediately
install it. Do what you think best, of course. As for me, and
many others, we will wait and lurk and let OTHER people beta test
for MS or ANY developer, and we are equally cautious and wary
about beta testing new software, e.g., Vista, on our Visa cards.

And, one more time, NO company selling ANY product soft or hard
EVER pre-announces far out UNLESS it is somehow advantageous to
THEM for PR or marketing reasons. Think about this one for a
minute: making XP work better ain't in MS's best interest, they
want you to buy a Vista upgrade. BUT, they DO have their OWN
interests in mind as I've said before, and if bundling all this
stuff into an SP saves them support time and money, they will do
it.

Good luck on whatever you decide to do.

> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in
> message news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com...
>| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett"
>| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:
>|
>| >
>| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
>| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
>| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for
>| > | 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary."
>| > |
>| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.ms
>| > | px
>| >
>| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for
>| > SP3.
>|
>|
>| No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced
>| no dates. Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan"
>| indicate that these are rough estimates, not promises.
>|
>| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or
>| change it, that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing
>| an estimate is not.
>|
>|
>| > And, they
>| > always say it's preliminary ;-)
>|
>|
>| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that
>| when the date is far enough in the future that they are
>| unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date and feel
>| assured of making it, *then* they will announce a date.
>|
>|
>| --
>| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
>| Please Reply to the Newsgroup
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Tom Willett]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

I don't disagree with you. I am not pushing for SP3, nor do I have a desire
to be concerned about it until it's actually released.

I was only pointing out that the release period can change, as they have
done 2 or 3 times. It's all tentative.

Tom
"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns998D623355D25ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
| Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du
| jour ...
|
| > I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing
| > different tentative release periods.
|
| Tom, please keep this in mind. First, there is NO reason on God's
| Green Earth to be lusting after SP3, no matter WHAT it has in it.
| Quite the contrary, you should be wary and cautious to the point
| of being frightened of the prospect if you intend to be an early
| adopter. I am NOT saying that MS EVER intentionally screws up,
| but they DO occasionally mess up a critical update or some other
| update. Hopefully, by the time an SP is put together, they've
| ascertained whatever the problem is and fixed it, or they may
| have simply ignored it if the number of bad reports is small.
|
| As to multiple dates on the web site, so what?! I'm not whacking
| on you, Tom, or anyone, but I just do not see the burning need to
| know a firm date. It isn't like you're going to drop dead of
| cancer the next day if you don't download it and immediately
| install it. Do what you think best, of course. As for me, and
| many others, we will wait and lurk and let OTHER people beta test
| for MS or ANY developer, and we are equally cautious and wary
| about beta testing new software, e.g., Vista, on our Visa cards.
|
| And, one more time, NO company selling ANY product soft or hard
| EVER pre-announces far out UNLESS it is somehow advantageous to
| THEM for PR or marketing reasons. Think about this one for a
| minute: making XP work better ain't in MS's best interest, they
| want you to buy a Vista upgrade. BUT, they DO have their OWN
| interests in mind as I've said before, and if bundling all this
| stuff into an SP saves them support time and money, they will do
| it.
|
| Good luck on whatever you decide to do.
|
| > "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in
| > message news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com...
| >| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett"
| >| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:
| >|
| >| >
| >| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
| >| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
| >| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for
| >| > | 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary."
| >| > |
| >| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.ms
| >| > | px
| >| >
| >| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for
| >| > SP3.
| >|
| >|
| >| No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced
| >| no dates. Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan"
| >| indicate that these are rough estimates, not promises.
| >|
| >| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or
| >| change it, that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing
| >| an estimate is not.
| >|
| >|
| >| > And, they
| >| > always say it's preliminary ;-)
| >|
| >|
| >| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that
| >| when the date is far enough in the future that they are
| >| unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date and feel
| >| assured of making it, *then* they will announce a date.
| >|
| >|
| >| --
| >| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
| >| Please Reply to the Newsgroup
| >
| >
| >
|
|
|
| --
| HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

> I don't disagree with you. I am not pushing for SP3, nor do I
> have a desire to be concerned about it until it's actually
> released.
>
> I was only pointing out that the release period can change, as
> they have done 2 or 3 times. It's all tentative.
>
> Tom

OK, Tom. Forgive me if I sounded stident or obstructionist, it is
just that I see so many people screw themselves into the ground
needlessly with unverified updates. You are correct, the update
date is tentative, and will be until it is announced - by
definition, right? Look what happened to MS when they advertised
last year that Vista would ship at Thanksgiving in time for the
Christmas buying season. It was a major PR disaster for them to
have to admit that THEY thought it was still too unstable to
release, and they delayed it for some months. Don't think they
intend to make that mistake again.

Now, I am certain they DO advise their developer base as well as
both private and public beta testers of the availability of beta
builds of what will become SP3.

And, Tom, I'm still curious. Why are you interested, perhaps to
the point of worrying about it, exactly when MS decides to
release? If your system is running fine now, and you've gotten
all the updates to install correctly, why temp fate? Once again,
these are the opinions of a wary old fool, YMMV.

> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998D623355D25ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>| Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du
>| jour ...
>|
>| > I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site
>| > showing different tentative release periods.
>|
>| Tom, please keep this in mind. First, there is NO reason on
>| God's Green Earth to be lusting after SP3, no matter WHAT it
>| has in it. Quite the contrary, you should be wary and
>| cautious to the point of being frightened of the prospect if
>| you intend to be an early adopter. I am NOT saying that MS
>| EVER intentionally screws up, but they DO occasionally mess
>| up a critical update or some other update. Hopefully, by the
>| time an SP is put together, they've ascertained whatever the
>| problem is and fixed it, or they may have simply ignored it
>| if the number of bad reports is small.
>|
>| As to multiple dates on the web site, so what?! I'm not
>| whacking on you, Tom, or anyone, but I just do not see the
>| burning need to know a firm date. It isn't like you're going
>| to drop dead of cancer the next day if you don't download it
>| and immediately install it. Do what you think best, of
>| course. As for me, and many others, we will wait and lurk and
>| let OTHER people beta test for MS or ANY developer, and we
>| are equally cautious and wary about beta testing new
>| software, e.g., Vista, on our Visa cards.
>|
>| And, one more time, NO company selling ANY product soft or
>| hard EVER pre-announces far out UNLESS it is somehow
>| advantageous to THEM for PR or marketing reasons. Think about
>| this one for a minute: making XP work better ain't in MS's
>| best interest, they want you to buy a Vista upgrade. BUT,
>| they DO have their OWN interests in mind as I've said before,
>| and if bundling all this stuff into an SP saves them support
>| time and money, they will do it.
>|
>| Good luck on whatever you decide to do.
>|
>| > "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote
>| > in message
>| > news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com...
>| >| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett"
>| >| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:
>| >|
>| >| >
>| >| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
>| >| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
>| >| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned
>| >| > | for 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary."
>| >| > |
>| >| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks
>| >| > | .ms px
>| >| >
>| >| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date
>| >| > for SP3.
>| >|
>| >|
>| >| No, they have made *no* changes because they have
>| >| announced no dates. Words like "preliminary" and
>| >| "currently plan" indicate that these are rough estimates,
>| >| not promises.
>| >|
>| >| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or
>| >| change it, that's a failure to keep their promises.
>| >| Changing an estimate is not.
>| >|
>| >|
>| >| > And, they
>| >| > always say it's preliminary ;-)
>| >|
>| >|
>| >| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like
>| >| that when the date is far enough in the future that they
>| >| are unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date
>| >| and feel assured of making it, *then* they will announce a
>| >| date.
>| >|
>| >|
>| >| --
>| >| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
>| >| Please Reply to the Newsgroup
>| >
>| >
>| >
>|
>|
>|
>| --
>| HP, aka Jerry
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Tom Willett]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

I am *not* interested in it, and I'm *not* worrying about it. Period. I
was simply pointing out that release dates *change*. I couldn't care less
if they ever release the darn thing ;-)

Tom

|
| And, Tom, I'm still curious. Why are you interested, perhaps to
| the point of worrying about it, exactly when MS decides to
| release? If your system is running fine now, and you've gotten
| all the updates to install correctly, why temp fate? Once again,
| these are the opinions of a wary old fool, YMMV.
|
| > "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
| > news:Xns998D623355D25ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
| >| Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du
| >| jour ...
| >|
| >| > I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site
| >| > showing different tentative release periods.
| >|
| >| Tom, please keep this in mind. First, there is NO reason on
| >| God's Green Earth to be lusting after SP3, no matter WHAT it
| >| has in it. Quite the contrary, you should be wary and
| >| cautious to the point of being frightened of the prospect if
| >| you intend to be an early adopter. I am NOT saying that MS
| >| EVER intentionally screws up, but they DO occasionally mess
| >| up a critical update or some other update. Hopefully, by the
| >| time an SP is put together, they've ascertained whatever the
| >| problem is and fixed it, or they may have simply ignored it
| >| if the number of bad reports is small.
| >|
| >| As to multiple dates on the web site, so what?! I'm not
| >| whacking on you, Tom, or anyone, but I just do not see the
| >| burning need to know a firm date. It isn't like you're going
| >| to drop dead of cancer the next day if you don't download it
| >| and immediately install it. Do what you think best, of
| >| course. As for me, and many others, we will wait and lurk and
| >| let OTHER people beta test for MS or ANY developer, and we
| >| are equally cautious and wary about beta testing new
| >| software, e.g., Vista, on our Visa cards.
| >|
| >| And, one more time, NO company selling ANY product soft or
| >| hard EVER pre-announces far out UNLESS it is somehow
| >| advantageous to THEM for PR or marketing reasons. Think about
| >| this one for a minute: making XP work better ain't in MS's
| >| best interest, they want you to buy a Vista upgrade. BUT,
| >| they DO have their OWN interests in mind as I've said before,
| >| and if bundling all this stuff into an SP saves them support
| >| time and money, they will do it.
| >|
| >| Good luck on whatever you decide to do.
| >|
| >| > "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote
| >| > in message
| >| > news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com...
| >| >| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett"
| >| >| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:
| >| >|
| >| >| >
| >| >| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
| >| >| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
| >| >| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned
| >| >| > | for 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary."
| >| >| > |
| >| >| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks
| >| >| > | .ms px
| >| >| >
| >| >| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date
| >| >| > for SP3.
| >| >|
| >| >|
| >| >| No, they have made *no* changes because they have
| >| >| announced no dates. Words like "preliminary" and
| >| >| "currently plan" indicate that these are rough estimates,
| >| >| not promises.
| >| >|
| >| >| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or
| >| >| change it, that's a failure to keep their promises.
| >| >| Changing an estimate is not.
| >| >|
| >| >|
| >| >| > And, they
| >| >| > always say it's preliminary ;-)
| >| >|
| >| >|
| >| >| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like
| >| >| that when the date is far enough in the future that they
| >| >| are unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date
| >| >| and feel assured of making it, *then* they will announce a
| >| >| date.
| >| >|
| >| >|
| >| >| --
| >| >| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
| >| >| Please Reply to the Newsgroup
| >| >
| >| >
| >| >
| >|
| >|
| >|
| >| --
| >| HP, aka Jerry
| >
| >
| >
|
|
|
| --
| HP, aka Jerry

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an Operating System,
not a printer driver. You appear to be emotional rather than objective.
Could very well have been a virus? What was the solution?
"student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message
news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu...
> It would depend on the "few" bugs wouldn't it? like a report that
> doesn't get printed because garbage was coming out of the printer
> for that person on the lan printer? especially the report was for
> the supervisor.....
>
> ms support say reload the driver which was already done; ms support
> say that there is a virus; user say text only files can get printed
> just word docs produce garbage. ms suport say call you back later
> & is never here from again.
>
> A few bugs? I do hope windows isn't ever used on planes or control
> equipment in hospitals. The os isn't ready to do the things that
> ms claims if bugs & unreliability are acceptable.
>
> I now shudder that I heard in the news that it is intended to
> have windows running some stuff in cars.......the "accidents"
> happened, be reasonable, there are million lines of code in
> windows, whats a few bugs...
>
>
> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>> If indeed you were a programmer particularly a micro-programmer then you
>> should have enough experience to recognize the complexity of an operating
>> system plus all the micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were
>> in
>> development you would know that regardless of the amount of testing some
>> bugs will show up after release. How can you possibly be so critical of a
>> few bugs? Compare today's PC's with those of just a few years ago. Be
>> objective not emotional.
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>> news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
>>>> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
>>>> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
>>>> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>>>
>>> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough,
>>> all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS,
>>> that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't
>>> mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they
>>> have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have
>>> a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those
>>> who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK,
>>> reverse engineering of several versions of the major components
>>> of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages
>>> of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS
>>> like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its
>>> copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers.
>>>
>>> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that
>>> naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and
>>> misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all
>>> kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC,
>>> they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush
>>> to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super
>>> competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange
>>> bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full
>>> diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively
>>> difficult.
>>>
>>> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more
>>> than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak,
>>> but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of
>>> improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating.
>>> I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say
>>> that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent
>>> claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for
>>> listening.
>>>
>>>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>>> jour ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>>>> programs.
>>>>>
>>>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>>>>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>>>>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is
>>>>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices
>>>>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than
>>>>> good most of the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>
>>

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Totally understand. Bear in mind however that each release of a new
operating system does so much more than the previous release.
"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns998CCD244E44ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ...
>
>> Also, ask yourself "why is the situation deteriorating". The
>> advancement of PC's has been absolutely phenomenal. Look what
>> they do today compared to two years ago. Advancement????
>
> This time I have the quotes straight. What I meant was that each
> successive release of Windows in the exact sequence you mention has
> been virtually an order of magnitude more complexity and lines of
> code, no matter of what type. So, again, I am hardly bashing MS or
> anyone, simply observing that /I/ feel that the situation is
> "deteriotating" in that Vista cannot help but be a problematical
> O/S until at least SP1, until at least all the HW manufacturers
> fully come on board with drivers, and all the major SW developers
> do the same. That's not being negative, it is being practical. As
> I'm sure you're aware, my watchword is that I will NOT beta test
> anyone's new anything with my Visa card. If others want to, that's
> fine by me. OK, friends?
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

> I am *not* interested in it, and I'm *not* worrying about it.
> Period. I was simply pointing out that release dates
> *change*. I couldn't care less if they ever release the darn
> thing ;-)
>
OK! Don't get excited! If I may just make the observation, if you
were as ambivalent as you say, why are you making such a (apparent)
fuss over what is really a non-problem? I'm with your last, I
really don't care when they release it, I'll wait anyway.

Have a good week. As for me, I'm going to shoot car pictures this
afternoon of the cars staging for the annual Woodward Dream Cruise
and intend to forget this PC stuff for awhile.

Incidently, Tom, one of our new vehicles was expected to be at
dealers in May, maybe June, and hasn't shown up yet, which tells me
that we're having an analogous problem to what MS had with Vista
last year, some production hitch. If I were in the market for this
vehicle, I'd probably be damn well pissed that I can't get it, but
I would MUCH prefer Chrysler to find and fix whatever the
productioon problems or parts shortages are than to have them ship
potential crap, as we did like all the car makers until they got
religion in the late 1980s/1990s that it ain't smart to destroy
their rep by shipping less than the very best vehicles they can.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides you with
security updates. Never gives you an update for a driver for example. I do
my updates manually and on at least two occasions stopped a download that
should NOT have been presented.
"ben" <abc@efg.com> wrote in message
news:e3nj67z3HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> HEMI-Powered wrote:
>> I agree with you about not getting enthralled with the next MS compendium
>> of fixes. First, MS's long track record of really bad releases of not
>> only individual patches but SPs has taught me to be VERY wary of being
>> the first kid on the block to install the latest and greatest. e.g., I
>> waited over a year after SP2 to be sure that the early adopters were
>> happy. While I obviously do not think SP3 will be that big a deal as you
>> say, there is still a STRONG likelihood of a major blow-down upon
>> install, especially if it includes IE7. I say that because I have
>> declined to install maybe 10-15% of today's SP2 critical updates after
>> lurking for awhile in these many MS NGs and seeing that those with auto
>> update turned on had grievous problems. And, I have a strong philosophy
>> of not trying to fix things that aren't broken, so if I think I've gotten
>> the updates I need/want - and I do think that - then in all likelihood I
>> will simply acquire SP3 but not install it on my present PC.
>
> My PC is about 3 years old now with autoupdate on and have never had any
> problems due to autoupdate.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an
> Operating System, not a printer driver. You appear to be
> emotional rather than objective. Could very well have been a
> virus? What was the solution?

Agreed. In ANY technical issue, or even seemingly benign things
like politics, I find it best to be the most factual and the
least emotional I can be. I have strong opinions, demonstrably,
but they are based on experience and not getting bent outta shape
for a truly minor problem, yet blaming the entire thing on MS.

Seems to me that I accused "student" of trolling all of us so
he/she can get a good grade in some freshman computer science
class instead of doing controlled testing and diagnostics,
starting always with a comprehensive malware scan.

"student" <guest@csus_.edu>
> wrote in message news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu...
>> It would depend on the "few" bugs wouldn't it? like a report
>> that doesn't get printed because garbage was coming out of
>> the printer for that person on the lan printer? especially
>> the report was for the supervisor.....
>>
>> ms support say reload the driver which was already done; ms
>> support say that there is a virus; user say text only files
>> can get printed just word docs produce garbage. ms suport
>> say call you back later & is never here from again.
>>
>> A few bugs? I do hope windows isn't ever used on planes or
>> control equipment in hospitals. The os isn't ready to do the
>> things that ms claims if bugs & unreliability are acceptable.
>>
>> I now shudder that I heard in the news that it is intended to
>> have windows running some stuff in cars.......the "accidents"
>> happened, be reasonable, there are million lines of code in
>> windows, whats a few bugs...
>>
>>
>> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>>> If indeed you were a programmer particularly a
>>> micro-programmer then you should have enough experience to
>>> recognize the complexity of an operating system plus all the
>>> micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were in
>>> development you would know that regardless of the amount of
>>> testing some bugs will show up after release. How can you
>>> possibly be so critical of a few bugs? Compare today's PC's
>>> with those of just a few years ago. Be objective not
>>> emotional. "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>> jour ...
>>>>
>>>>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS.
>>>>> How would you control it and/or keep your customers happy.
>>>>> Many companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and
>>>>> when a problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be
>>>>> objective.
>>>>
>>>> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long
>>>> enough, all the way back to the original PC that didn't
>>>> even have DOS, that came in with the XT, to understand them
>>>> pretty well. I don't mean to be vindictively critical, but
>>>> surely you will admit they have less than a stellar record
>>>> of their own releases, they have a rep for hiding key parts
>>>> of their various APIs even from those who buy their
>>>> development packages all the way back to the SDK, reverse
>>>> engineering of several versions of the major components of
>>>> MS Office have been found to contain fairly large
>>>> percentages of commands and API calls that seem not to be
>>>> documented, and MS like all commercial companies reserves
>>>> the rights to control its copyrighted software and give
>>>> "guidance" to developers.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at
>>>> all that naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe
>>>> that. Rogue and misbehaving applications, especially
>>>> systems utilities of all kinds, are rampant throughout the
>>>> 25 years since the first PC, they suffer from their own
>>>> bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush to bring new versions
>>>> to market no matter what. This super competitiveness all
>>>> the way around makes for not only strange bedfellows but
>>>> interlocking dependencies that can make full diagnosis of
>>>> major or even minor systems issue deceptively difficult.
>>>>
>>>> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am
>>>> more than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of
>>>> whence I speak, but in monitoring this and many other NGs,
>>>> I see no real signs of improvement, if anything, I think
>>>> the situation is deteriorating. I'm sorry if you feel I am
>>>> not being objective, let's just say that I am a pragmatist
>>>> and always suspicious of extravagent claims from ANY
>>>> developer on either side of problems. Thanks for listening.
>>>>
>>>>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>>>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>>>> jour ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll
>>>>>>> be amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by
>>>>>>> Non MS programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan
>>>>>>> protection? programs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed
>>>>>> at the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because
>>>>>> they must play ball or risk losing their certification.
>>>>>> But, it is certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands
>>>>>> of the novices will wreck an otherwise good system and
>>>>>> are more harm than good most of the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>
>>>
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> Totally understand. Bear in mind however that each release of
> a new operating system does so much more than the previous

This is PRECISELY why I hold the view I do - because it IS bigger
and far more complex. With Windows, since MS is obviously loathe
to destroy people's ability to use older, legacy apps and HW,
they must of necessity build every damn thing they've ever
encountered into each new release.

An easy example of this is the still annoying requirement not to
use the old DOS wildcard characters and other special characters
in a file name. Once they went to 255 char names, I think they
should at least give users the option of turning that off if they
know they're not running any "DOS" apps, which XP doesn't really
support anyway, or even really old Win 3.1 8.3 file name apps.

It is said that XP SP2 was an 80%+ rewrite, and I would imagine
that Vista is not only an order of magnitude bigger and more
complex, it is also a virtually 100% fresh-sheet-of-paper
rewrite. That is always good, but carries it's own risks. But
then, nothing in life is without risks, is it?

Have a great day!

> release. "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998CCD244E44ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>> jour ...
>>
>>> Also, ask yourself "why is the situation deteriorating". The
>>> advancement of PC's has been absolutely phenomenal. Look
>>> what they do today compared to two years ago.
>>> Advancement????
>>
>> This time I have the quotes straight. What I meant was that
>> each successive release of Windows in the exact sequence you
>> mention has been virtually an order of magnitude more
>> complexity and lines of code, no matter of what type. So,
>> again, I am hardly bashing MS or anyone, simply observing
>> that /I/ feel that the situation is "deteriotating" in that
>> Vista cannot help but be a problematical O/S until at least
>> SP1, until at least all the HW manufacturers fully come on
>> board with drivers, and all the major SW developers do the
>> same. That's not being negative, it is being practical. As
>> I'm sure you're aware, my watchword is that I will NOT beta
>> test anyone's new anything with my Visa card. If others want
>> to, that's fine by me. OK, friends?
>>
>> --
>> HP, aka Jerry
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides
> you with security updates. Never gives you an update for a
> driver for example. I do my updates manually and on at least
> two occasions stopped a download that should NOT have been
> presented.

Once again, this is my opinion and YMMV, but I vastly prefer to
get drivers from the HW manufacturer if I can at all, unless
there is some good reason to get them from MS. I've had too many
printer drivers, mainly for HP printers, simply not work at all
or not take advantage of the entire suite of features.

Incidently, I NEVER recommend updating drivers just for the
helluva-it! Way too much risk of destroying a working system if
you don't have the previous version handy AND you get even get to
your old files. I ONLY update drivers, of ANY/ALL kinds when I
have a known problem or there is some major enhancement I lust
after. And, honestly, I can't remember an example since I need a
driver for my old wide-carriage HP 1220C for XP, which HP happily
provided, as did MicroTek for my old Scanmaker 4 flatbed scanner.
In both cases, the MS driver was a POS.

"ben" <abc@efg.com> wrote in message
> news:e3nj67z3HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> HEMI-Powered wrote:
>>> I agree with you about not getting enthralled with the next
>>> MS compendium of fixes. First, MS's long track record of
>>> really bad releases of not only individual patches but SPs
>>> has taught me to be VERY wary of being the first kid on the
>>> block to install the latest and greatest. e.g., I waited
>>> over a year after SP2 to be sure that the early adopters
>>> were happy. While I obviously do not think SP3 will be that
>>> big a deal as you say, there is still a STRONG likelihood of
>>> a major blow-down upon install, especially if it includes
>>> IE7. I say that because I have declined to install maybe
>>> 10-15% of today's SP2 critical updates after lurking for
>>> awhile in these many MS NGs and seeing that those with auto
>>> update turned on had grievous problems. And, I have a strong
>>> philosophy of not trying to fix things that aren't broken,
>>> so if I think I've gotten the updates I need/want - and I do
>>> think that - then in all likelihood I will simply acquire
>>> SP3 but not install it on my present PC.
>>
>> My PC is about 3 years old now with autoupdate on and have
>> never had any problems due to autoupdate.
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:19:44 -0500, "Tom Willett"
<tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:

> I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing different
> tentative release periods.


OK, thanks.

I don't mean to give you a hard time over this, but there are many
people (not necessarily you) who see things like your original post,
and conclude that Microsoft has missed their scheduled dates, reneged
on their promises, is late once again, etc.

They simply don't understand the difference between an estimate and a
promise.




>
> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com...
> | On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett"
> | <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:
> |
> | >
> | > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
> | > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
> | > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H CY2008.
> | > | This date is preliminary."
> | > |
> | > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
> | >
> | > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3.
> |
> |
> | No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced no dates.
> | Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan" indicate that these are
> | rough estimates, not promises.
> |
> | If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or change it,
> | that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing an estimate is not.
> |
> |
> | > And, they
> | > always say it's preliminary ;-)
> |
> |
> | Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that when the
> | date is far enough in the future that they are unsure of it. When they
> | are closer to a release date and feel assured of making it, *then*
> | they will announce a date.
> |
> |
> | --
> | Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> | Please Reply to the Newsgroup
>

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

 

[student]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Why the warning when adding/updating a new driver that the driver
is "not microsoft signed"?? why should the os care whether the
vendor's drive has the ms signature & what is the purpose of
the ms signature?

As the file was on the windows server, the printout was done with
another computer. The user gave up for the day & shutdown his
computer; interestingly, after bootup the next day, he tried to
print the same file & it got printed ok.....

On 2007-08-15, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
> You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an Operating System,
> not a printer driver. You appear to be emotional rather than objective.
> Could very well have been a virus? What was the solution?
> "student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message
> news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu...
>> It would depend on the "few" bugs wouldn't it? like a report that
>> doesn't get printed because garbage was coming out of the printer
>> for that person on the lan printer? especially the report was for
>> the supervisor.....
>>
>> ms support say reload the driver which was already done; ms support
>> say that there is a virus; user say text only files can get printed
>> just word docs produce garbage. ms suport say call you back later
>> & is never here from again.
>>
>> A few bugs? I do hope windows isn't ever used on planes or control
>> equipment in hospitals. The os isn't ready to do the things that
>> ms claims if bugs & unreliability are acceptable.
>>
>> I now shudder that I heard in the news that it is intended to
>> have windows running some stuff in cars.......the "accidents"
>> happened, be reasonable, there are million lines of code in
>> windows, whats a few bugs...
>>
>>
>> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>>> If indeed you were a programmer particularly a micro-programmer then you
>>> should have enough experience to recognize the complexity of an operating
>>> system plus all the micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were
>>> in
>>> development you would know that regardless of the amount of testing some
>>> bugs will show up after release. How can you possibly be so critical of a
>>> few bugs? Compare today's PC's with those of just a few years ago. Be
>>> objective not emotional.
>>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
>>>>> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
>>>>> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
>>>>> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>>>>
>>>> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough,
>>>> all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS,
>>>> that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't
>>>> mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they
>>>> have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have
>>>> a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those
>>>> who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK,
>>>> reverse engineering of several versions of the major components
>>>> of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages
>>>> of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS
>>>> like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its
>>>> copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that
>>>> naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and
>>>> misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all
>>>> kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC,
>>>> they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush
>>>> to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super
>>>> competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange
>>>> bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full
>>>> diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively
>>>> difficult.
>>>>
>>>> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more
>>>> than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak,
>>>> but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of
>>>> improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating.
>>>> I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say
>>>> that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent
>>>> claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for
>>>> listening.
>>>>
>>>>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>>>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>>>> jour ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>>>>> programs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>>>>>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>>>>>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is
>>>>>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices
>>>>>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than
>>>>>> good most of the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>
>>>
>
>