I respect that that's your opinion, JT, and I respect the fact that you know far more about it than I do ... just as I'm sure you respect the fact that my experience was different, and the information given to me both by the Tech Support staff of my ISP and a visiting PC engineer was different.JonnyT said:
And I followed them and easily managed to uninstall it, but sadly that didn't correct the damage. As the sales staff at the PC shop mentioned, it was a bonanza month for them too, unexpected so long before Christmas, as many people were in the same position as I was.JonnyT said:
I'm not claiming that my experience is respresentative of the overall likelihood of people having difficulties, merely that it probably was at the time.JonnyT said:
FORMAT :cheesy: and reinstall
http://www.blackviper.com/
http://www.blackviper.com/
XP SP2 fine here too
As someone who also works in the IT industry i can agree that XPSP2 is a must and have also installed it many times with no major problems. I think many problems come from PC's that have either too little disk space for the install or already have problems (that the owners may not be aware of) such as Virus infection, Trojan horses, existing file or registry corruption etc etc.
As someone who also works in the IT industry i can agree that XPSP2 is a must and have also installed it many times with no major problems. I think many problems come from PC's that have either too little disk space for the install or already have problems (that the owners may not be aware of) such as Virus infection, Trojan horses, existing file or registry corruption etc etc.
Bluewave
Active member
- Messages
- 240
- Likes
- 2
JonnyT said:
....just like when your local garage serviced your car, or the plumber fitted a new boiler
It's easy to criticise when you have sufficient knowledge, but it's impossible to know everything about everything, and so we have to trust other's experience. Isn't that what these boards are for?That seems a remarkably uninformed view from someone in the industry IMO. I remember reading several online articles about IT managers who had refused to install SP2 until Microsoft had sorted out "certain issues" with it.awoodj said:
Sure, many have had no problems at all after the update. But there is a growing number who have had serious problems, not because of viruses/trojans/spyware or lack of disk space, but due to other issues with their PC that they could not possibly have corrected themselves. Your "etc. etc." is telling as with so many different public PC configurations out there, it's become impossible to write such a large OS upgrade without any problems whatsoever. Perhaps in an office full of similar PC hardware and software specs (and with IT people who know what they're doing) installing such a large update is less of a problem.
But credit to Microsoft for offering a free update that installs OK on the majority of XP PCs, and for quickly reporting ways of ressolving some issues that may crop up.
The basic point is that in my opinion the vast majority of home PC's are very poorly configured/maintained in terms of Security. The main problems XPSP2 causes are due to Microsoft attempting to force good practise such as having a Firewall, Anti-Virus software and applying software updates on to users. In some cases where poorly configured systems or software applications require this lacking security environment they may fail after the upgrade. This is an an unfortunate side effect and in the long run is for the best i believe. Most of the problems stem from the Firewall side and through use of the exceptions element can usually be fixed. It amazes me to see how many people connect their PC's directly to the Internet via ADSL or cable with no hardware or software firewall, don't apply any patches then expect their PC's to work correctly, XPSP2 will fix some of this over time. Even worse is that i have seen a number of installations done by Telewest engineers and they don't even turn on the Windows Firewall. Also if you think it does not effect you then think again these same PC that send you junk mail and allow hackers to implement Denial of Service attacks.
As a side issue i am a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer who works for a Microsoft Gold Partner. I sat and passed the Windows XP option of as part of the MCSE qualification (the study material is 900 pages of in depth content about XP) and have also worked in the IT industry for 15 years, including work on various Firewall products. Perhaps that qualifies my opinion as un-informed but i guess it is up to you to judge.
As a side issue i am a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer who works for a Microsoft Gold Partner. I sat and passed the Windows XP option of as part of the MCSE qualification (the study material is 900 pages of in depth content about XP) and have also worked in the IT industry for 15 years, including work on various Firewall products. Perhaps that qualifies my opinion as un-informed but i guess it is up to you to judge.
Bluewave said:....just like when your local garage serviced your car, or the plumber fitted a new boiler
That seems a remarkably uninformed view from someone in the industry IMO. I remember reading several online articles about IT managers who had refused to install SP2 until Microsoft had sorted out "certain issues" with it.
Sure, many have had no problems at all after the update. But there is a growing number who have had serious problems, not because of viruses/trojans/spyware or lack of disk space, but due to other issues with their PC that they could not possibly have corrected themselves. Your "etc. etc." is telling as with so many different public PC configurations out there, it's become impossible to write such a large OS upgrade without any problems whatsoever. Perhaps in an office full of similar PC hardware and software specs (and with IT people who know what they're doing) installing such a large update is less of a problem.
But credit to Microsoft for offering a free update that installs OK on the majority of XP PCs, and for quickly reporting ways of ressolving some issues that may crop up.
I'm also an MCSE and a Cisco CCNP and agree 100% with awoodj.
You simply have to install SP2
May I also say I have installed SP2 on over 30 different PC configurations i.e. different manufactorers, different hardware, laptops etc etc and have only had problems with existing applications and the Firewall. All have been easily resolveable.
There is certainly no way a newmachine is required. I have seen some Motherboards that require a BIOS upgrade but this is because the manufactorers are not supporting P4s correctly and not really a Microsoft problem. Again a easy fix.
JonnyT
You simply have to install SP2
May I also say I have installed SP2 on over 30 different PC configurations i.e. different manufactorers, different hardware, laptops etc etc and have only had problems with existing applications and the Firewall. All have been easily resolveable.
There is certainly no way a newmachine is required. I have seen some Motherboards that require a BIOS upgrade but this is because the manufactorers are not supporting P4s correctly and not really a Microsoft problem. Again a easy fix.
JonnyT
wheezergeezer
Well-known member
- Messages
- 368
- Likes
- 8
I'm an MCP................( note the standards dropping !! )
I agree with both of your posts, but one factor always surface's when posting on these boards..................
you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink it, Good Luck...............
ps, any vacancies ?
I agree with both of your posts, but one factor always surface's when posting on these boards..................
you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink it, Good Luck...............
ps, any vacancies ?
The latest issue of Computer Active magazine has a workshop to fix start-up flaws in sp2. It seems it affects PC's with the combination of specific processors and motherboads.They have 2 free downloads available one is to identify your combi and the other is a patch from Microsoft to solve the problem.The workshop gives advice on what to do before installing and what to do if you have problems after installing.I am not recommending this - It's up to you if you want to read it.
Yes, indeed. I also even remember reading an email which came (eventually) from the technical support people at Microsoft saying the same thing! I posted it on another thread at the time so that people would be aware that even Microsoft were admitting great problems with SP2.Bluewave said:
Awoodj and JonnyT.
I am using XPhome with the SP2 upgrade and am using BT Broadband and very pleased with it.
I have Norton firewall enabled all the time and do not get any problems (touch wood)!.My questions are .
Can I use the XP fire wall together with Norton Firewall and would this make it even more secure etc.
Would the XP fire wall be more efficient on it's own than Norton.?.
Any other advice regarding this would be helpful.
Hope you can help Regards
I am using XPhome with the SP2 upgrade and am using BT Broadband and very pleased with it.
I have Norton firewall enabled all the time and do not get any problems (touch wood)!.My questions are .
Can I use the XP fire wall together with Norton Firewall and would this make it even more secure etc.
Would the XP fire wall be more efficient on it's own than Norton.?.
Any other advice regarding this would be helpful.
Hope you can help Regards
Hi
Having 2 software Firewall's running on the same machine is probably not going to help and may also cause you problems. I would tend to stick with one or the other, if you want more security then add a hardware based Firewall router to your Internet connection. Companies such as Netgear make some fairly good home user type ones and they are now fairly easy to configure too.
Sorry I don't have a definitive answer on how good the Norton one is compared to the XPSP2 firewall as i don't use Norton and it would also depend on what version of Norton you had.
Having 2 software Firewall's running on the same machine is probably not going to help and may also cause you problems. I would tend to stick with one or the other, if you want more security then add a hardware based Firewall router to your Internet connection. Companies such as Netgear make some fairly good home user type ones and they are now fairly easy to configure too.
Sorry I don't have a definitive answer on how good the Norton one is compared to the XPSP2 firewall as i don't use Norton and it would also depend on what version of Norton you had.
To add to my last post here is a review of various personal Firewall's including the one in XP (prior to SP2)
The comment about the XP one not blocking Trojans etc should be less of an issue with XPSP2 as it now prompts you when an application tries to make a connection outwards which should alert to suspicious activity. It is also far more configurable than the original one.
http://www.pcw.co.uk/products/software/1153293
The comment about the XP one not blocking Trojans etc should be less of an issue with XPSP2 as it now prompts you when an application tries to make a connection outwards which should alert to suspicious activity. It is also far more configurable than the original one.
http://www.pcw.co.uk/products/software/1153293
TheBramble
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,394
- Likes
- 1,170
While having XP SP2 installed on a brand new rig before ANYTHING else goes on seems like a good idea, even just one 'bad story' of installing it OVER a currently operational rig is enough to make any sane trader think twice.
So, for all you experts out 'there', what is the downside of NOT installing SP2 on a currently running rig that has firewall and antivir firmly in place?
So, for all you experts out 'there', what is the downside of NOT installing SP2 on a currently running rig that has firewall and antivir firmly in place?
I'm really sorry, I don't know. It was the default setting on my last PC (the Windows XP version 1 machine). I didn't have to do anything. It just (once or twice) told me "an application is trying to contact something external ... do you wish to permit this procedure, click here for details" or something like that. I honestly can't remember the wording now. I'd never seen it before. But I there must be a way to tell it do it, if it could have arrived with those settings. JT might provide an answer for you, though: he knows a lot more than I do.aarie5 said:
awoodj.
Thanks for coming back with your reply to my questions.
I am currently running Norton Internet Security 2004,this includes their firewall,anti virus etc and I am happy with this .I will continue to run it on it's own as you suggest.
I think XP is better than the Windows 98SE I was using before and so far I feel secure with the Norton Firewall.
Thanks again,regards.
Thanks for coming back with your reply to my questions.
I am currently running Norton Internet Security 2004,this includes their firewall,anti virus etc and I am happy with this .I will continue to run it on it's own as you suggest.
I think XP is better than the Windows 98SE I was using before and so far I feel secure with the Norton Firewall.
Thanks again,regards.
