Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Releases SP4 for Windows 2000
Snake_Plisken writes "I checked Windows Update today on a lark and found that Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 has been released." You can read a short CNet article discussing the media player patches as well as one more about
the fixes in SP4.
Does this include anything like the lovely mess they introduced with SP1 for windows XP? If it does, I won't bother installin it on my work computer.
But when are they going to release a service pack for Windows NT4?
As with other OS service packs through Windows Update, you won't be allowed to download/install it without a valid license.
~Berj
I'll wait until it's been ported to Linux.
Best Windows Freeware
AWWWWW...I just got SP3 installed last night!
CB
free ipod and free gmail!
Any brave souls out there already applied this yet? I am looking at about 100 Win2K boxes that will potentially need this...so anyone with feedback would be greatly appreciated.
I thought windows XP was the service pack!
// Empires come and go we live forever
Someone post the diffs between SP3's and SP4's EULAs :)
OMG where has slashdot come to?
Instead of publishing every minor version release of linux, it also started publishing a story for every patch from microsoft.
--
Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
Go here for the change log to Windows 2000 Service Pack Four. Some of the changes are quite amusing.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." - Oscar Wilde
And we just upgraded from NT-SP6 to 2k-sp3. Another week of pain for us.
Here's the Service Pack:
1 00 0101001100100000000001111110101010010101010101...
10101010010010001010111101000001010110100111111
Yeah, right! Come out of the closet. You like Microsoft! This guy can't be trusted ;)
Honk if you're horny.
And here you can read about the newest security leak which is not patched by this servicepack ;) :)
That guy who analysed the buffer overflow also found a funny easteregg in the buggy dll file.
Another Microsoft patch? It must be Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays...
Slashdot, reporting on a Windows update, without making some kind of wise-crack about it?
Did Microsoft buy OSDN?
..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
Now I can upgrade from Windows 2000, SP3, hot fix 06052003, ntoskernel patch 5.0022, security rollup 05142003. Yea!
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
As always, please read before blindly updating...
SP4 FAQ
Lists of fixed bugs
DavaK
The Scary part is, I've found Win2000 to be the most stable and reliable Windows ever released. 63,000 defects? I wouldn't doubt it. The part that worries me with how well 2000 works, how many defects do the 9x, XP, and NT versions contain?
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Slashdot slashdots itself!
>duckhide
Don't pick up the pho*(@)$*@&@!@ NO CARRIER
I find it absolutely hilarious that the day after they release MS-021 and MS-022 they release SP4, which only includes up to MS-019. Just in time to make the SP not-so-up-to-date!
I checked Windows Update today on a lark...
:)
Quick! Somebody port Linux to a sparrow so we can stay ahead of the curve!
Today songbirds, tomorrow fur bearing mammals!
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
I'd bet anything SP4 is just a big f*cken piece of spyware. SP3 was close. SP4 is probably even worse. Makes Win2K act more like XP.
I bet this enables DRM to help with that damn DMCA, lousy RIAA! God, I wish someone would patent "ability to restrict user's rights" so we could get through all this crap. Anyone know if this patch uses any SCO code? Either way, with those dummies at Microsoft, it'll screw SOMETHING up. Thank god they don't have any such issues with Linux, even on something as small as my Zaurus. Is IE updated in this SP? Mozilla seems to be working fine for me. Ha!
This Post is Slashdot Approved
Another SP.. means it's time to backup everything "just in case".
Stupid murphy's law. Why can't you be more like moores law? At least we get some benefit from you!
Anyone who is subscribed to the WKML knows that this path has been in CVS
for ages. Good news though, Palmer Cox will be maintaining the old versions
for all of you ancient Win98 types.
Can't wait to get my hand on Longhorn, I heard Andrea Billcangeli is working
on a better DRM architecture.
Do MS programmers get extra options if they release products with buffer overflows? It seems like every third security flaw is caused by buffer overflows.
...is the one that gave Microsoft access to the system with power to add/remove software.
Bill Gates labelled this bug a "critial" security hole and asserted that its closing demostrates Microsofts commitment to secure computing.
"We want to ensure the public that we mean it when we call Windows the safest operating system in the world. And to continue to support this assertion, we began work today on Service Pack Five that will fix the security holes introduced with Service Pack Four," Gates said in an interview with the New York Times this morning.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
we just got done with testing on sp3 and gave the ok for the techs to install it yesterday.
you're all figments of my deranged imagination
At least it shows they still offer support for older products, rather than completely abandoning like with 3.1, 95, and 98. Although with the advent of new EULAs, activation, and the repealment of stand-alone IE one must wonder if there will be an SP5, or will it simply say "Oh, I'm sorry, Windows 2000 is now obsolete. Give us $200 and we'll give you XP"
Not trying to troll, but it's happened in the past, and given the circumstances surrounding current versions of Windows and Microsoft's business model, it seems more likely than not.
WTF! 63,000 bugs.
Sheesh.. Do they have a quality control department?
do you have any concept of how software development works in large corporation sir
And to think that in 1990 that was written as a joke... now it seems like a rather accurate description of reality.
Beep beep.
And thus this is that was needed to have IE free windows Bug Fix 810649
</sarcasm>
[alk]
We all know what this means, another service pack will be hurried out shortly to fix whatever awful bug this one introduces... :-)
I checked Windows Update today on a lark...
That just says it all right there, doesn't it? Checking the patch levels on the most widely used operating system in the world is considered a flighty, fickle act one does in a moment of insanity.
It's almost enough to make me wish I didn't relate to the sentiment.
how long will it take now to install win2k and all the service packs? a couple of my friends who have worked with win2k said that it takes a few hours to install because of all the patches , drivers, and reboots inbetween.
> "I allege that SCO is full of it" -Linus
The latest service pack apparently has about 675 bug fixes.
Great. Only 62,325 more! Go Microsoft!
I heard he was dead!
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
now that's funny!
If this was Apple they give it a dot rev and charge $129 for it.
So when will MS start using bittorrent? I know I should be able to download this faster than 60K/s :-\
Well, you know, it's hard and time-consuming to check to make sure that every time you put something into a finite memory space that it'll fit!
And time == money.
Well they can tell if you have an INVALID license pretty easy.. via pirated serial numbers.
... I hope they don't read this and get any funny ideas )
If they restrict downloads to be available only people that have *registered*, that will make it even easier for them.
Then, later on when you have to provide some of the original registration info, it will cut down even further on the ability for some of us to get patches that never register out of desire for privacy. ( eeek
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Per the appealate court ruling, SP4 removes Java from your Windows PC...
Actually more than that - they counted as high as 65535, but then their bug-reporting software went titsup.
My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
I hate to say it, but when I read changelogs for many Linux apps (or the kernel), they simply say "Fixed bug in foo.c". That doesn't tell me a whole lot as an end-user.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
look at thatr window. the hate for microsoft really blows my mind. i mean, it's true hate.
Before upgrading to SP4, make a back up! I will on my workstations. Use a drive image software like Norton Ghost. If SP4 is bad, then restore the image(s). These utilities are life savers. :)
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
People cite this '63,000 bugs!' statistic as if it's proof that the software is bad.
It isn't. It's proof that the software WAS bad.
Win3.1/95/98/ME were all total garbage. WinNT was better. Windows 2000 is *very good*; it is at least as stable as Linux is, and it is MORE stable as a desktop.
(I'm differentiating between "the operating system" and "the services" here; I think IIS is much less stable than is Apache, and Microsoft DNS sucks rocks. But the fundamental Win2K OS itself is as good or better than Linux, and enormously MORE stable as a desktop.)
Yet, this is the operating system that "has 63,000 bugs, so it must be crap!". Poor thinking. This means that they finally developed a method to CATCH and FIX the bugs. This means that PREVIOUS iterations of WIndows sucked, not that Win2K does.
Let me start off by saying I am a Linux user and love it, but it always amuses me when Microsoft issue patches, the chuckling that comes from the Linux community...Like Linux never needs patching, in fact Linux is patched ALOT.
We all know the people exploiting security holes and writing virii for Windows computers are Linux users...What would happen if people as skilled as the Linux community turned on Linux...I'll tell you, patches would be released as quickly and with as much fanfare as for Windows.
Is Linux a better OS than Windows..YOU BET, but lets be realistic.....LET THE FLAMING BEGIN!
This site has a pretty good list of weird MS Support documents.
Not really, once you remember that the *printf *scanf families have return values.
All's true that is mistrusted
I'm not looking at the terms of the EULA to confirm this, but I've read that MS Service Packs are cumulative, in that when you install SP4 you are agreeing to install SP3 (along with its EULA). If true, this means that by installing SP4 you are agreeing to the terms of SP3.
Nope, no sig
um, not to be a M$ apologist, but buffer overflows constitute the majority of all security flaws.....in all software. it's not just Macro$haft. and it's more like 1 out of every 3 security flaws is NOT a buffer overflow.
you're all figments of my deranged imagination
Win2003 which is 3 months old?
You never move to a new MS Server product until at least SP 1 and usually SP 4-5.
Except this is what it was: a trojan, but with an all new date, and an all new filename. Someone has just rereleased this baby.
Fortunately, a few things clued me in:
(1) It said it was from Microsoft. But the URL said from a Verizon ad.
(2) It called me a Microsoft Client. I've never felt so humiliated. I do *NIX or Mac.
(3) It claimed to fix ALL the known security flaws in Windows. This one should have been obvious.
(4) It was advertised to work on Win9x, ME, and 2000. My guess is that Microsoft doesn't do a whole lot for Win95 people who haven't upgraded. I could be wrong.
(5) It included an executable. [??? how did that slip past my ISP??? They normally strip executables.]
Anyhow, for those of you who use Windows, be aware [once again, and again and again] that those trojans are not to be run.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
I guess you don't have any hardware that needs drivers.
MS Windows 2000 and run it on a 64 bit processor?
I guess you'll have to pull your head out of your ass before you start posting comments.
Of course, the existence of the bug in the first place never put their customers at risk. What a crock of shite. Reminds me of MS's recent purchase of a virus protection sooftware company.
1. Sell software with security holes
2. Sell protection against those same holes
3. Profit!
The arrogance is astounding.
I sure hope it runs under winex!
Anyone else besides me ever see the DHCP Microsoft server when it used to say "Dynamic Hose Configuration Protocol" in an unpatched NT 4 box??
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
See once again Bill Gates was right.
If only we'd all been happy with 640kb there would be far fewer places for potential buffer overflows in Microsoft applications.
But, oh no, we insisted on colour and sound and Bob - okay perhaps not that last one; each guzzling Megabytes of RAM, and look where that has led us!
Best wishes,
Mike.
Comment?!
There is no service pack for the "french" version of W2K, like there was for the 2nd service pack. I do hope they end up making one or that it doesn't matter which one you install...
I downloaded the 2nd service pack *twice* last time: one time in english (to realise it wouldn't install) and one time in french.
Fun-fun-fun.
Semantics is the gravity of abstraction
In a related story, the RIAA said it would be using this exploit to find out who has mp3s on their computer.....
Clearly service packs don't follow the Star Trek rule.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
One security hole in windows media player, sometimes ya gotta really wonder where these's boys are really coming from.
I was actually looking for a place to find Microsoft's EULAs online. Does anybody know of such a place? Or should I start my own site?
By the way, could you help me? Please?
OH NOES!!! IT APPEARS YUO DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY FOR DIS HERE PIZZA! WAHT EVER ARE YOU GOING TO DO!?!?
... is that foo.c has more bugs than the 63000 Windows bugs mentioned elsewhere.
Not only that, but just about every Linux kernel and every textbook that is used to teach students seems to use foo.c!
Unlike many linux distros which include hundreds of packages with fatal bugs.
Well, there goes my uptime.
Interestingly enough, the only two languages SP4 appears to be available in, currently, is English and German.
Not to say that Microsoft is authoritarian or anything, but I can just hear Colonel Klink saying it now...
Ve Haff Vays of MAKING YOU UPGRADE!!!
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
as in http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=261186
--open--
Now that Windows Server 2003 or .net or whatever (2003 maybe?) is nearly done.
"I wonder what it's like living in a constant haze of stupidity" - Hiei, Yu Yu Hakusho
With Windows 2000 Service Pack 4, the software maker added various security and compatibility fixes and provided support for USB (universal serial bus) 2.0 and for wireless Internet connections. Im pretty sure my computer already supports USB 2.0. I want some Hi-Speed USB support instead.
I'm trying to read the EULA before I try to install it. But there does not seem to be any link to read the EULA so that I can decide if i agree to the agreement before i go thru the trouble of downloading it.
Can anyone please just copy/paste the text of the SP4 EULA?
thanks
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
Why did the parent get modded +1 Funny instead of -1 Troll? Oh nevermind, almost forgot this was /.
./appname
Oh, coulda shoulda woulda. Everybody knows you invoke an application in the same directory by typing
Taco musta had his head up his ass when he came up with this domain.
I use linux, and I know for a fact that there aren't any buffer overflows in linu\026\073\065\0121\073\043\032\013
[root@localhost]#
Installed it, no problems thus far. Windows 2000 Advanced Server, but I use it as a personal workstation, not a server. Actually fixed a problem I was having with UserEnv, and my profile not being closed when I logged out of the network or something. SP4 fixed it right away, which was nice.
Over a year ago I fould an easy to reproduce blue screen crash in windows 2000 caused by debugging an application when a menu is open. I stumbled onto it by accident and found an easy way to reproduce it. I couldn't find a way to contact MS though, I searched everywhere on their page and could only find info about their pay number for support... nothing about submitting detailed bug reports. I haven't checked to see if the bug has been fixed in SP3 yet, let alone SP4. If it hasn't, how could I tell them about it?
Speed Demos Archive - Lots of speed runs!
Where are these items found? I know what Automatic Updates is, but the two items you mentioned aren't anything I've ever worked with before.............
fooÂfaÂraw ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ff-rÃ)
n.
1. Excessive or flashy ornamentation.
2. A fuss over a trifling matter.
-- dictionary.com
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of **insert current Slashdot topic**. Sweet!
Can someone post a BitTorrent Plz.
Thanx!!!
They are two services that you can control through the "Computer Management" or "Services" management consoles. Try right clicking on My Computer and selecting "Manage". There should be a whole bunch of things to destroy in there if you have admin rights.
Thank bob for these. I've been waiting for these for a long while. Hibernate is a real time saver, but I can do with less device problems and without the occasional corrupt MBR when using it.
Interestingly enough, XP does an excellent job at hibernating, but my next laptop will be running OSX. I can't see myself paying out for an XP upgrade. Pretty colors, system restore, and it breaks PGP for only 150-200 dollars? No thanks.
Total of 65,000 bugs - estimated 28,000 are âoerealâ problems
> 21,000 âoepostponedâ at time of release (Feb 2000)
> 27,000 âoeunfinished workâ or âoelong-forgotten problemsâ
The original source was a ZDNet article quoting a Microsoft memo. The article is no longer online. I have more related information here.
Developers: We can use your help.
Post it to NT-bugtraq?
Because XP feels so flashy, childish and dumbed down, I'd either go to Linux or Win2k if my current XP install goes completely ka-boom. 99% of what I've done with XP is make it like 2k, but once that was done I don't see any technical reason to downgrade either.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
read the license. you can legally run it.
I've been holding out from applying SP3 from the few Win2k boxes I support for two main reasons.
One is the EULA that came with SP3. It's sounding like that has improved a lot, maybe even enough to quiet those paranoid voices I hear in my head everytime thoughts of Microsoft come around.
But the other big sticking point for me is Microsoft's habit of including functionality 'upgrades' with their fixpacks. DRM support, etc.
Bug fixes are important, but I'd really prefer not to incur any functionality/policy changes along with the bug fixes.
Anyone know how SP4 is with regards to these?
Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
After actually taking the time to read all of those fixes (I hope some of them actually work) I'm going to immedatly start testing this for deployment. Contained within that mass of different security issues, are some basic and very important ones that I've had to deal with.
As a rult, aoof the odd service packs are garbage and cause more problems than they fix, but I may actually go from SP 2 to SP 4. Since, again, the rule of thumb is the odd ones are evil and the even ones clean up the mess from the odd ones.
Hopefully I'm not alone in seeing the good in this. That is of course asusming it actually works.
The MD5 sum for W2KSP4_EN.EXE is:
a4ef6c91d418418b287cefe31f958175
I checked Windows Update today on a lark
Are you using an update of the Avian Carrier standard? Or is there simply a lack of pidgeons in your area?
If its a new standard, can we see some benchmakrs, and comparisons with the Avain system. Also does it support IPv6?
Thanks
I can't for the life of me understand some of the comments I read in response to this article about SysAdmins who are actually INSTALLING this thing right now to a bunch of users without testing!
This isn't a flame against Microsoft, it makes sense to fully test anything like this, be it OSX, Redhat, Windoze, whatever. Those that are deploying without testing are doing SysAdmin's in general a complete disservice-- it makes us all look bad when something goes wrong.
It just doesn't make any sense to me to even consider deploying before it has been out a while and tested. A service pack is a cumulative rolloup of security fixes and bug fixes and occasionally some enhanced features. Yes, there are additional fixes that haven't been distributed yet, but unless you HAVE to install it, you can wait a couple of weeks and test it in production before deploying it to everyone in your company.
Look at Winnt SP3 and SP3a. They released SP3a shortly after 3 because of some problems with the service pack. Frankly, I wouldn't want to be the sysadmin who installed it on all my clients to discover all the problems! Crazy!
"Look! There! Evil, pure and simple from the Eighth Dimension!" --Buckaroo Banzai
Yes, but that's _AFTER_ the buffer's been overrun.
snprintf is the one that's needed.
Advanced users are users too!
Well for most of the /. readers it is about the most sophisticated novel they have ever read.
loose != lose
to != two != too /. != news
When I installed SP3, it removed all my "pre-SP3" hotfixes, presumably because those fixes were all contained in the service pack. When I installed SP4, it failed to do this, leaving about 10 hotfixes or so in my add/remove programs list, which is annoying clutter. I clicked on change/remove for each of these and received an error (apparently the keys to delete these hotfixes have been deleted), which also allowed me to remove the entry from the list. I had a single pre-SP5 hotfix, which allowed me to remove it (i.e., it did not return the same error as the pre-SP4 ones), although I did not continue. So it appears that SP4 does correctly remove the ability to delete the hotfixes (as they no longer exist), but neglects to remove them from the list. -Dan
Debian GNU/Linux - Security Alerts from 2003
36 out of 130 of the security vulnerabilities reported by Debian this year (as of June 26th) were caused by buffer or stack overflows.
your->mouth->insert(your->foot);
to note:
Windows XP Professional
Product Availability: December 31, 2001
Mainstream Support: December 31, 2001 - December 31, 2006
Extended Support: December 31, 2006 - December 31, 2008
Windows XP Home Edition
Product Availability: December 31, 2001
Mainstream Support: December 31, 2001 - December 31, 2006
Extended Support: Operating systems designed for consumers do not have an Extended phase
they bot end the mainstream spport, but the home version does not have esxtneded support. All other 'consumer' version of window has/had it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I won a free copy of Win2K during a promotional giveaway that Microsoft was running when it was first released. I've never had to pay for a Windows OS in my life, and I never will, and this way I can still run Windows legally.
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
Perfection must be a terrible burden.
Are you so fucking stupid that if someone uses the wrong word, it confuses you so much that you can't understand what they are trying to say?
Let me help you out. Get over it, it is not that important.
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Windows fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Windows machine (a Pentium 4/3.2GHz w/8 Megs of RAM) for about 2 hours now while it attempts to copy a 2 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 2 hours. At home, on my Macintosh SE running Mac OS X, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this PC, the same operation would take about 2 seconds. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Internet Explorer will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Photoshop is straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various PCs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a PC that has run faster than its Apple II counterpart, despite the Intel's faster chip architecture. My IIe with 64 megs of ram runs faster than this 3.2GHz PC at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the PC is a superior machine.
Windows addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Windows over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.
A little club soda should take care of it.
I once spent 2 1/2 months trying to get them to acknowledge a bug EXISTED before my "pet tech" went to a 2 week class and gave me the option of starting over with a different flunkie or closing the call...
(We came up with a work-around ourselves the very next day.)
Simple maths:
Pentium IV 3.0gig cpu + 1gig RAM + WinXP/2K = 486DX66 w/16MB RAM.
It's like hitting your hand with a hammer. It feels so good when you stop.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You can actually make a copy of your 2K CD-ROM and patch it with SP4 so that your fresh reinstall will be 2KSP4 right out of the gate. See here for more info. I've done this with SP2 and SP3 with great success.
Note: This only saves you the one reboot required after SP4. So you will still need to patch IE, WMP, etc... separately if you use them, and incur any reboots their installers require. However, you shoudn't need to reapply SP4 after each of those since it's your base install.
Balamas always.. , Please use the mirrors, Check the change log.
err..wait wrong...thr....n/m
"Come on, how many icons and groupings can a default win2k have wrong? I doubt they have 10,000 help pages."
:)
Doesn't sound like ya know, does it? I don't know how you can leap from an "I doubt" comment to a "this is clearly..." statement.
"This is why Windoze 2000 can't run more than a few days in a row."
Funny, I had a home-made Tivo running Windows 2000 that had an average up-time of 3 months. I've got an NT4 Exchange Server that's been up for 80 days here. We used to have an IIS webserver running gon NT4. It was up for well over 6 months. We never needed to restart it, but we did have to physically move it a couple of times. My desktop machine has been running for about 13 days now. It'd have gone longer but my UPS is flaking out on me. Not bad for a machine that I do 3D animation and play games on.
" Trust your observations to tell you that software simply sucks."
Think I'd be defending 2K if I had 'observed' that the software 'simply sucks'?
"Balderdash! Windows2000 runs on intel 386. Wince runs on ARM. That's it. What do you think this is, free software that's compiled to specific x86 processor families, Motorola, ARM, Alpha, "
A machine is not a processor, it's a complete setup. Never heard of the old "Windows is on 90% of desktops" stastic before?
"you will always be at the mercy of the service patch that requires you to give up hope of privacy."
Actually, if you had read the EULA instead of going by the sensationalized Slashdot version of it, you'd know that the purpose isn't for MS to go sniffin around your machine. The reason it's there is to support a number of the features they added to Windows to deal with the virus problems that have been plaguing it. Go read it.
"Pull your head out of your closed source place please."
I would suggest you do a little thinking on your own instead of repeating all the stuff you've heard on Slashdot that gets modded +5 Insightful.
"Free software has fewer bugs and does more than any dinky windoze distro will ever. "
That's a myth. I'll give the Open Source community credit for responding to bugs in a timely manner, but you need to face facts that Open Source Software is rarely both well designed and bug free. Run a few commercial apps in front of an ordinary user and then run a few free apps in front of an ordinary user, most of the time he or she will be able to tell you which is which. "well, the commercial one seems to be friendlier to me while the free one is confusing to use."
" The complextiy you are thinking of is a legacy of all the dirty tricks M$ used over the years to kill of software rivals. That does not exist in free software and never will. "
Yeah, that's scientific. Heh.
"This is why free software PCs don't have to be turned off until the power fails."
Riiiiiiiight. We'll see how stable your Linux machine gets when games start becoming available. You'll find out just how 'rock-solid' it is then. Linux machines are not being used like Windows machines are, so drawing comparisons like that is not very informative.
Nice bit of Linux propoganda tho. Bucking for a +5 Insightful?
You paid $5 more than I did.
Well, actually that's not true; the CDR cost me ~CDN$0.40.
Anyone know how badly this breaks terminal services? Damned MS, they never could make a service pack that didn't break terminal servers in some way or other.
With so little likely return, no sense is spending the resources on it when the next home OS will have long been out already.
Home users upgrade much more often than business users.
-
..with Active Directory's group policy. Just create a GPO, set software installation to assign and point it at update.msi (the extracted flavor of win2ksp4.exe). Link the GPO at (site | domain | OU, take your pick) and go away. It'll get installed.
Geek used to be a four letter word. Now it's a six-figure one.
"The GUI is confusing and misleading, but 63,000 problems? Come on, how many icons and groupings can a default win2k have wrong?"
There's a lot more to the Windows UI than just drawing icons and and blitting text to the screen. There are refinements made to the Windows UI intended to help people. Sometimes, those go awry, though. It's not necessarily because the code is bad, but the original idea wasn't encompassing enough to all of the users out there.
For example, one of things Windows 2000 will do is reopen the Explorer windows you had open before. Nothing wrong with that. For most people, that's great. However, I found an interesting circumstance where this will cause an error message.
There's a little command-line app called 'subst.exe' that takes a folder and maps it to a drive letter. So I can take the c:\temp folder and make it the x: drive. That's handy if you want to have a consistent drive letter on every machine you use. (Psst Lightwave users: this is a great trick to keep your content directory consistent!) However, the drive doesn't get mapped until after the booting process is done and the app is run. No big deal, if memory serves, this feature actually dates back to the DOS days. It's not a super-huge feature that everybody in the world uses. However, if you have one of these drive letters open in explorer and then reboot Windows, you'll get an error message when it boots back up that says "The folder no longer exists!" Ouch! Oh wait, it does exist, it's just not where Explorer expected to find it!
This techincally isn't a problem. Everything is working as expected. The defect in this case is that subst.exe could play nicer with Explorer by keeping track of temporarily established conditions. It's a complication arisen not out of poorly written code, but an unexpected interaction between two apps. I have a seriously hard time imaginging that the philosophies of the free-software writers that you're talking about wouldn't have encountered a similar problem at some point. I bet it happens all the time. Well, Windows has a ton of apps like these that all come with a basic install. All these permutations are bound to cause numbers in the 64k range of things that could be fixed.
I agree with AnonV, Linux will find itself in a similar situation. Though I'd agree with parent poster that Linux would potentially not have those problems for very long. In theory, the person who finds the problem could fix the bug. However, I wouldn't bet too much on that idea. The more people that use Linux, the lower the percentage of users who would even be capable of fixing the problem, let alone motivated to do so.
"Derp de derp."
>I think they're at SP6 for that one....
SP6a actually, SP6 had some problems.
Microsoft officially stops selling NT4 licenses
and providing support on the 30th of July, which is next monday.
I will still be running it for some time to come.
NT4 includes version 2 of IE. IE2 is so old it dosn't support http1.1 and can't access virtual hosted sites cutting it off from a lot of the web.
With mozilla it is practical to run NT4 without installing a later version of IE. Installing IE4+ and ending up with bits of IE jammed into the system DLL's significantly slows down NT. Without IE it is pleasent to use on a 200MHZ machine given plenty of RAM.
I want a new version of NT4 with updated drivers and USB support which I would happily roll out instead of 2k. Microsoft plans to maximise revenue direct otherwise.
So uh when you ask for a patch to this problem, is that MS or Norton that you would call? Really this is unacceptable.
If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank
NT wasn't even originally developed for x86. It was developed for an intel processor that I can't remember the name of. When that processor failed to materialize, NT was ported to x86. NT also ran on PPC and Alpha machines as well. Hell, it was that way until late in the Win2K beta days when MS pulled support for the other architectures. Granted, it never ran on anywhere near the number of architectures that linux / BSD has, but that's not because it isn't portable, just because MS doesn't really need it to right now.
Geek used to be a four letter word. Now it's a six-figure one.
...it's not stable, when you can crash it by holding right-CTRL and hitting Scroll Lock twice! 0840v90e79876(*&F^D*&2638 NO CARRIER
M$ blows
90 day uptimes, brags the NT dude, ha ha ha.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
FIXME: Users can still play whatever they want. Look into/correct this.
"These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
Selling or distributing any product in Canada is a funny thing to try to do in Quebec. The Quebec, Office De Lingue Francais or the language police (as the rest of Canada calls them), have most likely given MS shit for ignoring language laws on their software packaging.
If the MS eula is not distributed en Francais, then some smart French Canadien could dispute it, and would no dought win. You cannot even sell Corn Flakes in Canada without French on them. Of course I have never eaten Frenched corn flakes so I do not know how French on them tastes. However, my wife is French and she tastes great!
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
I just installed sp4, and stupid me for not selecting backup existing files. Now whenever I open windows explorer I got a blue screen and my laptop reboot immediately.
A lesson to learn, not to trust new software especially from MS
I am no microsoft fan. I run Linux at home, my work desktop, and almost every server I build... However...
Christ Almighty couldn't make WinME stable with the help of a dozen M$ software engineers and Gates himself. A stable WinME box? Heh. If such an animal existed, up would be down, black would be white, and I'd be able to get a tan.
My place of employment utilizes two Windows ME boxes to display NetView statistics on HUGE plasma screens in our main support center.
Now, I know that they don't do much but display netview, but in my year and a half there, I have never seen them go down or crash. We've only had to reboot them due to power outages.
Sig.i>
What the? How the hell is this post off-topic?
Someone's been smoking too much weed...
sorry folks, but unless i'm reading something wrong - and i totally admit that i may be - but it appears that MS had made some massive wholesale changes to their EULA...
/. MS cynic.
i can't believe that this has happened.. i'm sure i'm missing something... this is completely not their way. Yes, i am an official
previously, SP3 mentioned that they basically retained the right to modify, delete, or install software to ensure that DRM was functional...
SP4 is not at all that way.... i know.. scary.. but it appears that they no longer believe your computer is THEIR computer.
d. Windows Media Digital Rights Management.
    Content providers are using the digital rights management
    technology for Windows Media contained in this Software
    ("WM-DRM") to protect the integrity of their content
    ("Secure Content") so that their intellectual property,
    including copyright, in such content is not misappropriated.
    Portions of this Software and third party applications such
    as media players use WM-DRM to play Secure Content
    ("WM-DRM Software"). If the WM-DRM Software's security
    has been compromised, owners of Secure Content ("Secure
    Content Owners") may request that Microsoft revoke
    the WM-DRM Software's right to copy, display and/or
    play Secure Content. Revocation does not alter the
    WM-DRM Software's ability to play unprotected content.
    A list of revoked WM-DRM Software is sent to your
    computer whenever you download a license for Secure
    Content from the Internet. Microsoft may, in
    conjunction with such license, also download
    revocation lists onto your computer on behalf of
    Secure Content Owners. Secure Content Owners
    may also require you to upgrade some of the WM-DRM
    components in this Software ("WM-DRM Upgrades") before
    accessing their content. When you attempt to play
    such content, WM-DRM Software built by Microsoft
    will notify you that a WM-DRM Upgrade is required
    and then ask for your consent before the WM-DRM
    Upgrade is downloaded. WM-DRM Software built
    by third parties may do the same. If you decline
    the upgrade, you will not be able to access content
    that requires the WM-DRM Upgrade; however, you will
    still be able to access unprotected content and
    Secure Content that does not require the upgrade.
    WM-DRM features that access the Internet, such
    as acquiring new licenses and/or performing a
    required WM-DRM Upgrade, can be switched off. When
    these features are switched off, you will still be able
    to play Secure Content if you have a valid license for
    such content already stored on your computer.
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
Yes, I definitely posted that in Photoshop.
And BTW, SEs shipped with 1MB of RAM and maxed out at 4MB, the closest thing to a color SE was the Color Classic/Color Classic II.
Eat recycled food - it's good for the environment, and OK for you.
I've seen most Windows versions install. I've used most Windows versions. My question is, why does Windows have a tendency to rattle disks, alot.
For example, when W2k installs, there is a point (after it has booted) where the floppy activates, and stays that way for a few seconds. What is it doing except making noise?
When you asked W95, W98 and newer versions to do an auto search for new hardware to install, the primary hard disk made the most awful sound. It sounded like HDTach running or something. What was the OS doing to the hard disk?
Any answers or further anecdotes appreciated.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
After installing Win2K SP4 my Visual Studio debugger flaked out - running the debugger hung dev studio and my app. Grrrr!!!
Applied SP4 to a test machine and all has been well so far, but will need several more days hammering on it hard. I have found Win2000 to be very stable and reliable. Oh sorry, I forgot I was on Slashdot, were any positive thing said about Microsoft must be prefaced with:
1) I'm no fan of Microsoft, but...
2) I'm forced to use it at work, and...
3) I'd hate to admit it, but..
4) It's painful to say so, but...
... is somewhat troubling. I am unable to cleanly reboot the box (it just lays there like a lame date), and I had to remove two instances of a file called mobsync.exe in order for my system to regain stability. With this file running, I was unable to run any instances of the explorer (including control panel) and the entire system became unstable. Luckily, I was able to bring up the Task Manager to kill it, and used Find to find/delete the files. The file protection box will pop up, of course, but you can decline to have the files reinstalled.
Just my experience so far...
"You're getting brutal, Sark. Brutal and needlessly sadistic."
"Thank you, Master Control"
-Sark and the MCP
I normally don't bite for trolls, but I couldn't help:
:-P
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
The *LICENSE* doesn't discriminate. It's the GPL. The GPL doesn't descriminate.
If Taco wants to discriminate against all people that are under 5 feet tall and stop them from using Slashdot, it's his perogative. But he can't stop 4-foot people from using "his" GPL'd code.
Hmm. I see what you're getting at.
Um... ok... Do you often have conversations with yourself?
I have no choice; Taco has effectively said that I must use a different messaging system if I want to use this software's feature.
IF you want to use the software. It's his software! Copy it and make percent-dot or hash-dot (pound-dot) or something. He won't stop you.
PS. Just use the Jabber field. Everyone who sees @hotmail.com will figure it out.
*OR* you can just not set your IM client field. He isn't forcing you to.
Oooh, he decided he doesn't want an MSN option. He must be evil!
Maybe there's another reason; all he said is it's "not a bug". Hell, it could even just be "wishlist enhancement" instead of "bug".
Computer may stop responding for up to one hour durring startup
...oh...of all the things I thought would turn out to be a "feature"...
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
For your reading pleasure:
SUPPLEMENTAL END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
MICROSOFT WINDOWS 2000 SERVICE PACK 4
PLEASE READ THIS SUPPLEMENTAL END-USER
LICENSE AGREEMENT ("SUPPLEMENTAL EULA")
CAREFULLY. BY INSTALLING OR USING THE
SOFTWARE THAT ACCOMPANIES THIS SUPPLEMENTAL
EULA, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS
SUPPLEMENTAL EULA. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO
NOT INSTALL OR USE THE SOFTWARE AND, IF
APPLICABLE, RETURN IT TO THE PLACE OF
PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND.
THIS SOFTWARE DOES NOT TRANSMIT ANY
PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION
FROM YOUR COMPUTER TO MICROSOFT
COMPUTER SYSTEMS WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT.
1. GENERAL
This EULA is a legal agreement between you (either an
individual or a single entity) and Microsoft Corporation
("Microsoft"). The accompanying Microsoft software
includes computer software and may include associated
media, printed materials, online or electronic
documentation, and Internet-based services
(collectively, the "Components"). The Components are
provided to update, supplement, or replace existing
functionality of Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional,
Microsoft Windows 2000 Server, Microsoft Windows
2000 Advanced Server, and Microsoft Windows 2000
Datacenter Server (the "Software"). Your use of the
Components is subject to the terms and conditions of
the end user license agreement (either from Microsoft
or some other entity) under which you have previously
licensed the Software (the "Software EULA")
and this Supplemental EULA.
IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF
THE SOFTWARE, YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO
INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE COMPONENTS
AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS
SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.
2. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF YOUR USE
OF THE COMPONENTS
a. Installation and Use.
Provided you comply with all applicable license terms and
conditions contained in the Software EULA (which are
hereby incorporated by reference except as set forth
below) and this Supplemental EULA, Microsoft grants
you the right to reproduce, install and use one
copy of the Components on each of your computers
that is running a validly licensed copy of
the Software ("Computers").
b. Reservation of Rights.
The Components are protected by copyright and other
intellectual property laws and treaties. Microsoft
Corporation or its suppliers own the title, copyright,
and other intellectual property rights in the Components.
All rights not expressly granted to you in this Supplemental
EULA are reserved. The Components are licensed, not sold.
c. Capitalized Terms.
Capitalized terms used in this Supplemental EULA and not
otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned
to them in the Software EULA.
3. AUTOMATIC INTERNET-BASED SERVICES.
The Software features described below are enabled by
default to connect via the Internet to Microsoft
computer systems automatically, without separate
notice to you. You consent to the operation
of these features, unless you choose to switch
them off or not use them. Microsoft does not
obtain personally identifiable information
through any of these features. For more
information about these features, please see
your Software documentation or the Microsoft
online support site.
a. Windows Update Features.
Under the Software's default configuration, if you connect
a device to your Computer and the correct device driver is
not available on your Computer, then Windows Update
features on your Computer (including Device Manager
and the Plug & Play CDM Module) automatically attempt
to check Microsoft computer systems via the Internet
for the correct device driver. Having this happen
With NT, MS released 3 bad SP's: 2, 4 and 6. :). On WIn2k though, sp2 was very good, sp3 was crap. It has to be so that SP4 is great ;) (it works ok on the testserver that's routing my internet conne**NO CARRIER**
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
Total number of bugs: 63,000. .191111MB/bug
SP4: 675 bugs fixed, 129MB patch;
By the time they fix them all: 12GB footprint!
Cygwin's traceroute reveals something interesting: $ tracert.exe download.microsoft.com Tracing route to a767.ms.akamai.net [193.189.170.200] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 10 ms 10 ms 20 ms tm.213.143.68.1.nm.telemach.net [213.143.68.1] 2 20 ms 10 ms 20 ms SiOL-TM.siol.net [212.30.64.241] 3 20 ms 10 ms 20 ms 213.250.19.202 4 * 30 ms 20 ms www.whitehouse.gov [193.189.170.200] Trace complete.
Using traceroute to find the reason why downoad.microsoft.com is so fscking fast in Slovenia reveals something interesting:
$ tracert.exe www.whitehouse.gov
Tracing route to a1289.g.akamai.net [193.189.170.200]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 20 ms 30 ms 20 ms tm.213.143.68.1.nm.telemach.net [213.143.68.1]
2 10 ms 20 ms 10 ms SiOL-TM.siol.net [212.30.64.241]
3 10 ms 20 ms 10 ms 213.250.19.202
4 20 ms 30 ms 20 ms www.whitehouse.gov [193.189.170.200]
Trace complete.
Or metamod the mod.
My service pack 4 doesn't even work! Heres the error message i get after it unpacks: "The core system file (kernel) used to start this computer is not a Microsoft Windows file. THe Service Pack will not be installed." What?
I used ME as my gaming OS until just recently. The coder trolls finally wrote vid drivers for XP
that could give me better frame rate with my 9700 AIW. Before you rebut, my standing as a forty-something technology professional who has forgotten more than you twenty-something punks will ever know gives me the right to say whatever the f**k I feel like saying. Flame away, but I'll be too busy making money(you know, the thing you don't do from your mom's basement while you dick around with Linux) to read any of them.
so I installed it and now my w2k won't boot, it just
starts up, blue screens and restarts!
I'm typing this from my redhat install, how do i uninstall this plague?
-me
Does that mean Windows 2000 isn't an Enterprise OS after all?
++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
So, if i don't update my department's machines before i'm off to holidays, something terrible might happen. And if i do update, and then head off for holiday, something will.
OK, maybe those machines will stay up for when i am away (yeah, right).
~rL
Has anyone out there applied SP4 to a two-node Windows 2000 Cluster yet, and if so how did things turn out? Clustering services for Windows is very sensitive sometimes, however I will take any opportunity to stabilize that I can!
... [Insert decent Sig]
I have little hope of you still reading this but here goes:
I _have_ to agree with you that Win2k is the best operating system ever to be produced by Microsoft. Yes I'm counting XP.
When W2k came out I was saying to people: if they keep this up, they have a very good chance of keeping the lead for virtually forever. Then came the new licensing and other 'misbehaviour' (on the bussiness part) and I gave up on them.
The most insightfull part about your comment I find the part where you say
I think it will depend on how willing the graphics hardware designers are to let the drivers be developped by the open source community and not much else. Which may mean that this particular part of stability comparisons isn't on the Operating System but on the graphical drivers, or at least the graphical sub-system. I think that Linux will be better than Windows at this part too, once the graphics part is nailed down. What I'm basically saying is: Linux is ready for the office desktop, not for the home desktop.
So, you're right that if you use Linux in the same way that people use Windows for tasks that Linux currently isn't "fit" for yet, Windows comes out on top. However on tasks that they can both do (in terms of "designed for the task") I think Linux, and any Unix for that matter will beat the pants off of Windows for the same hardware and demand, both in performance and stability. (Turning your argument around).
When Linux becomes a real contender, the nicest thing about that is, I think, that it became popular in the office environment first, then spread to the home which is completely reversed from how Windows became ubiquitous. It probably is also the reason why people at home will get a better computer experience from it when this happens.
As a closing remark: it is people like you, with whom one can argue with on the facts, that keep me coming back here.
Karma? What's that again?
MD5 checksum of "D:\setup\patches\W2KSP4\W2KSP4_EN.EXE":
a4 ef 6c 91 d4 18 41 8b 28 7c ef e3 1f 95 81 75
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
W2K came out in 1999. There have been 4 major SvcPacks released for it that contain bug fixes and added features (all at no charge).
Apple release OS X in 2001. First it was 10.0, then it was 10.1, then 10.2, and now 10.3 Each point release costed around $150. And, OS X just *really* reached a stable, useable condition around late 10.1 or early 10.2
So, MS wins this category too. Now, let's compare market share...
2000 Has inconveniences, and they aren't technical. The tools are hidden through one more layer of shortcuts.
XP has problems. Stuff is better hidden, and default options are offensive. Hmmm, I'll check my C: drive, "warning, looking at this can damage windows," I want to do it anyway, hey there is nothing here, "yes I want to see contents of C: drive (after tracking down option), hey, windows directory isn't here...
I can deal with technical limitations, but stupid child-proofing pisses me off.
You got me into this! You were the ideologue! I'm only a poor assassin! - Twenty evocations, Bruce Sterling
I installed SP4 and rebooted. I noticed that every thing was running v e r y s l o w l y. I found a process in task manager that was sucking up all my cpu cycles. I uninstalled it and my system works to speed. I don't know about this SP4. Has anybody had a good install?
Today is an ephemeron, doomed to the crypt of yesterday.
I never liked it 'cause it sounded too much like a verb.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
Never update or make a change on Friday or before a holiday. This is a best practice.
As for SP4, I'll wait a few weeks before I upgrade my wife's laptop (on the off chance Microsoft will have to pull it or update it).
Take your "266 machine" and your script kiddie toys and play with these people. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, take your $100 bill, fold it till it's all sharp corners and shove it up your ass.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
"I have little hope of you still reading this but here goes:"
;)
Email notification's great, isn't it?
"I _have_ to agree with you that Win2k is the best operating system ever to be produced by Microsoft. Yes I'm counting XP."
I have XP on my laptop. I can honestly say I don't mind it it all. Unfortunately, I cannot measure it's stability against a desktop as my laptop is rebooted twice a day. (I'm not a big fan of it running while I'm in the car.) I can say that I've been doing a lot of 3D work on it and it's been stable for me. I can't give you an up-time estimate, though. I like it as a laptop OS, but have little reason to want to put it on my 2k desktop that's been problem free for ages.
" Which may mean that this particular part of stability comparisons isn't on the Operating System but on the graphical drivers, or at least the graphical sub-system."
I'm quite confident that this is the issue. I've observed it on both Windows and Linux. Start getting 3D graphics involved and suddenly you've got a questionable machine. I wish I could tell you that I had scientific evidence of that, but I don't. My company's building a system using Linux boxes that's running 3D hardware. I was surprised at all the problems they've had. First it was getting the driver to work, then it was getting the app working right when a different video card was used. Then there was software mode. Geez. I can't believe how complex it is. They have to troubleshoot everything.
"I think that Linux will be better than Windows at this part too, once the graphics part is nailed down. What I'm basically saying is: Linux is ready for the office desktop, not for the home desktop."
I, for the most part, agree with you. The problem is that Linux's 'greatness' is only part of the equation. Good drivers still have to be produced. And for that, companies like NVidia will have to say "this is a priority". It's hard to imagine they'll get all that attention while Windows has such a vast majority of the marketshare. However, there is one really strong point to make for Linux: Movie studios are migrating to it. NVidia would not want to let ILM down.
I do think, though, taht Linux will have a very difficult time getting into the home desktop until a company gets involved in making the UI home-friendly. Making a good UI involves more than coders, it involves design people. I haven't been exposed to every free-app out there, but every time I see one it's very easy to see that it's an engineer designed interface. That alone will be a problem for home adoption.
"However on tasks that they can both do (in terms of "designed for the task") I think Linux, and any Unix for that matter will beat the pants off of Windows for the same hardware and demand, both in performance and stability. "
I don't have any issue with that argument. I think you're probably right. To be fair, though, Linux has been developed to do those jobs almost exclusively. (well that may not be the right way of putting it, but I'm in a bit of a hurry and am having difficulty finding the right term.) For example, Microsoft feels that a Windows machine, even a server, must have a good interface. Linux, on the other hand, feels that a server should be a server and little else. So basically, the Linux box is set up once to run the server and is tuned to run that task indefinitely. This is the best way to handle a server setup. Microsoft hasn't dropped down into that level, though supposedly the 2003 server MS made should support running in a CLI mode. Remove the Windows graphic system from the mix, and you greatly reduce the number of threads of things happening there. I can't help but think a huge stabililty boost will grow from that. Who knows? So yeah, I agree, but to be fair MS and the Linux Community have different design philosophy (each with their own strengths) so it's not exactly an apples to apples comp
ghey
You will have to DoS them all. When they put you in jail, you will wish it was only a pointy $100 bill.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
does anyone know how to completely disable windows file proection (WFP) on sp4? i've tried the same technique for sp3 and unfortunately it doesnt work. (i patched sfc.dll
my blog
Installed SP4 on a working stable networked box. After installation, the PC could access the LAN and the router, but could no longer access the Internet. Checked the network settings - nothing had changed. Checked (and reset) the router. Uninstalled and reinstalled the TCP/IP stack. Still no go. Finally uninstalled SP4 and everything's back to normal. I guess I'll wait for SP5.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Last night I applied sp4 to several computers, All of the computers that did not contain an nvidia card came out alive. However the computers containing nvidia cards WOULD NOT BOOT, not even into safe mode. I am further investigating the matter and will post my final analysis upon completion. Just a word of caution for the weary.
When I saw Anonvmous Coward's response to this complete bullshit, I lowered my threshold so I see who wrote this and add you to my foes list. Then realized that you were already there.
I have mandrake 9 boot loader on my win2k machine.
"The core system file (kernel) used to start this computer is not a Microsoft Windows file. The Service Pack will not be installed. For more information, see Knowledge Base article at http://support.microsoft.com."
Note: it does not say WHICH article.
PS: I hate microsoft.
Thanks for the reply. I'll be thinking about your arguments for some time but this thread will close soon enough so I would like to divert further discussion to a thread on a new article on this issue. (We probably won't have to wait long, this being /. and all.)
Karma? What's that again?
Um, no. Windows is no where near to where Linux is in security. The so called training is simply a PR move.
You can believe what you want, but it's still wrong. And MS patches are a pain in the ass to install. I don't like having to agree to yet another EULA, restart, and wait forever for each patch to run itself. Mandrake Linux's updater is much easier.
PS, if you aren't a troll, why are you afraid to sign your name to your post?
#include "sig.h"