Slashdot Mirror
IBM Tells Employees To Hold Off WinXP SP2
robpoe writes "As reported by ZDNet, IBM's technology department has warned internal users to not install Windows XP SP2 until IBM can fix some known issues with the way IE6 is updated, and Big Blue can make a customized version of the patch - 'The company's technology department said the delay is 'due to known application problems and incompatibility with IBM workstation applications.''" However, the article also mentions that: "One IBM employee in the company's internal technology department characterized the decision as routine."
Scary headline to read while I'm in the middle of installing it right now!
Never has a first post confused me more than this one. :)
Hey, lots of companies install policies on their IT assets that flat out prevent installing unauthorized patches on corporate systems.
This is a pretty big patch, and people have known for a while that it's going to change the way some things work. It makes sense to show caution before allowing a mass deployment. There's not much news here.
This is very much standard practice here at IBM. We aren't even supposed to use windowsupdate and instead use an internal tool that installs patches.
WinXPServicePackNews.com?
I think you need to read the blurb again. Particularly the part about "employees" and "internal users".
Isn't this sort of decision standard in any large organisation? As with any upgrade, IBM will want to ensure that the upgrade isn't going to break any internal applications. No large organisation is going to want employees installing significant OS upgrades without central verification.
We have asked all of our XP users to hold off until we can verify it. So this should be a good practice at any company
Hehe...maybe slashdotters out there have become so overworked that they just moderate you according to your post title. Time to put that theory into practice.
I just installed it and now my I'm getting the BSOD. Dang it! I went to Linux to get rid of the !@#$ BSOD!
Oh, nevermind... my bad. That was just my screensaver and someone unplugged my mouse.
The only thing necessary for Micro$oft to triumph is for a few good programmers to do nothing". North County Computers
i'm sure the IT crew has more than a few things to do already!
Side note: just went cruising dell's site for any word on putting sp2 on the gf's new Dimension xps and didn't see much mention of it by way of "don't do this yet" or "my god people hurry and install", so i'm going to call tech support (i heard that chuckle) and see what they have to say on the matter. Prolly have it down by rote at this point after getting more than a few calls about it. If it were my pc, i'd do it just to see all the stuff and give it a shot, but the "my stupidass boyfriend fucked up my computer" doghouse is not where i want to be....ever!
Helpful Deployment Tools Here
How long do you think it takes for an organisation with over 300 thousand employees to change its employees' desktop environment? How many much smaller organisations still use NT 4?
IBM's technology department has warned internal users to not install Windows XP SP2 until IBM can fix some known issues
And of course, the first thing that happens is, this internal memo somehow finds its way to ZDNet. Looks like PR FUD to me.
It's good though, at least Microsoft gets a little of its own medicine once in a while...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Bah, all apps run on the web? Good grief. I'd hate to run a visual C++ compiler located on a website. We've already had that solution - it was called VAX, but instead of using websites, it used dumb terminals.
Besides, the problems with SP2 involve webbed and internet apps. Anything that opens up a port causes the new SP2 firewall to throw up all sorts of alarms, unless it's local loopback only.
Tepp
This is especially important for XP SP2, because it does break a lot of stuff. In particular, it breaks the (enterprise class) products we produce in several places (I personally am working on our own hotfixes to be sent out ASAP). This is the sort of problem companies like IBM want to avoid. So, all things considered, this is a total non story.
"One IBM employee in the company's internal technology department characterized the decision as routine."
One Microsoft employee in the company's unspecified division of vaguery was alleged to have characterized a response which resembled "We OWNZ you biatch!".
No really, they did.
"It's not your information. It's information about you" - John Ford, Vice President, Equifax
The reason we're being told to hold off is that the new IE might not be compatible with some internal applications on the intranet (stuff like, payroll, expenses claims etc). There's no wording that SP2 breaks stuff in general, just that some critical IBM apps are effected. So stop scare mongering!
Windows XP Service Pack 1a was merely a release that made them compliant with the Java VM lawsuit. SP1a does not include Microsoft's version of the virtual machine.
Check your facts before you post.
The really funny thing is, I don't think there's a big pressing need to install this patch. Waiting a while is the best move to make.
What does this patch do for you? Well, I've been using RC2 for awhile, and here's what it's done for me:
1) Broken Thief III such that when I load levels, my computer crashes.
2) Screams bloody murder when an app opens a port - except for loopback - but even when I explicitly wanted that port opened it still raises a dialog.
3) Messed up MSN Instant Messenger's hotmail addin so it now links to Outlook and Outlook Express even though I don't even USE Outlook.
4) Messed up my MSN Instant Messenger buddy list by trying to group them into random categories I didn't even want
5) Installed more gooblygook into Windows Media Player that asks for copyright protections etc that I don't want and makes me go through the configuration screen all over again
6) Added a popup blocker I didn't want - that I can't easily turn off - into IE - that conflicts with Google Toolbar - instead of one easy click to get a popup on a site that you were expecting to pop up (such as a separate chat window for customer support), you now need to go into the options to turn popup blocking off, then click the google toolbar... twice the hassle.
And other nice oddities.
I say, wait until this beast has been patched...there's nothing worth running out for.
Tepp
I used to work desktop support for IBM and can tell you that IBM has its own web-based software distribution and installation service that it uses internally. The same thing was done for SP1 - users were told not to install from Windowsupdate.com and were instead told to install from the internal servers after the patches were changed to work better with the IBM internal machines - this is because there are modifications made to the Windows image used in system builds resulting in a custom IBM build of Windows so to speak. No real shocking news here.
A company testing new software before installing it on every system they have? Why I never! Next thing you know they'll be telling us that we should not run every attachment we get in our email.
I bet they're just sucking up to the Linux crowd. First the public display of affection for open source, then the We-won't-sue-Linux french kiss. Now they drop the big one: "we don't trust MS either." Maybe they finally got a real marketing department. :)
Specifically it was NOT addressed to clients (note Sam doens't call them customers anymore).
It was a letter on the IBM Intranet addressed to the 300,000+ IBMers (for reference, I am one. I've read the letter. Of course, I do NOT speak for IBM). The letter does not mention specifics, but IBM develops a TON of software for use internally. These applications have to be tested with SP2 before they release SP2 internally.
This is completely routine, and has been done on many patches before this one. It is IBM being cautious and testing a new component with the thousands of other pieces of software that keep IBM moving. I for one, am glad our IT staff takes the time to do this.
Actually we can install stuff on our destop and laptop machines, just so long as it isn't illegal ... they rely on our commonsense.
If we do stuff up our machines they'll just blank them off and re-image them, after all our work docs should be on the network drives.
Its better to have a system with known quirks than an system with unknown quirks
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
It could be the "updated" IBM version of SP2 is a nice clean Linux install...
*narf!*
The funny thing is the last sentence of the story: "One IBM employee in the company's internal technology department characterized the decision as routine".
So a routine decision makes the front page of Slashdot, clearly advertized as "IBM doesn't trust Microsoft".
The basic anti MS movement is still out there.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
Not give local administrator rights to the users machine would be a good start ... can't install it then can they :-)
Or you could ban internet access entirely, most users don't need it anyway.
"Sexy Man" is not an moderation option.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
I have WinXP Home SP1 with all the latest updates applied. I downloaded the SP2 .EXE file from microsoft.com's download and attempted to install it.
The installation went fine except that somewhere in the middle of the installation I got "Access is denied." error. The installation program then went and de-installed what was partially installed and restored it to SP1 (Thank Goodness!). This was while logged in (as the only user in the system) with administrative privileges. Windows was rebooted and it booted fine in SP1.
I rebooted SP1 in Safe mode and logged in as the Administrator. I repeated the installation process with exact same error "Access is denied.". Again, reverted to SP1 successfully
I am thankful that it was possible to change back to SP1 and WinXP booted. But, I just can't seem to be able to install SP2. Now, I am scared than earlier about trying it for the third time.
Osho
Well duh, they want to make sure it works with all their software. I'm sure they are mostly talking about their close customers who rely on IBM for their business, and IBM can't be sure everythig will be smooth. But seriously this is the same as me telling all my office not to download and install it personally to wait untill I have tested it and I will deploy it for them
How does this get modded as informative? I'll be the first to burn MS as the stake, but IBM isn't rolling out because they failed to udpate thier OWN INTERNAL APPS, not becaue there is something wrong with SP2.> they failed to udpate thier OWN INTERNAL APPS.
You choose your operating system to work with your apps, not the other way around.
You don't run a corperation on bleeding edge, which is why RedHat Advanced server,seen as lowly by slashdot, is really a lot more appropriate for the corperate server room.
IBM hasn't updated their apps. This is normal. Unless there is something in the new version that Justifies it, or that version is EOLed by the vender, nor should they.
In spite of that, a "Service Pack" shouldn't break applications. To Sun, IBM, HP, Linux users, a "Service Pack" is a cluster of patches. To Microsoft, a "Service Pack" is whole lot of shit to foister on the clients without given them the option to install only what they need.
This is one reason why MS truly isn't ready for the datacenter.
IBM is just following standard change management/control procedures. Of course, they want to ensure that their own internal application still work after the apply of SP2. Whats wrong with that ? I hope most organisations will test SP2 out in test environments before rolling out to production PC's. This is just common sense. I pity some people who cant understand normal change control procedures. This is a mind set that unfortunately appears to be being lost - these are lessons learned nearly 30 years ago on mainframes. The same principles still apply today whether it be mainframe, nid-range or PC's. This has nothing to do with IBM's clients - this is for their own internal systems. Some people are implying that this is a plot to undermine Microsoft and promote Linux - IBM is a conundrum of ideas and directions - there are people pushing Windows and some people pushing Linux. I am not biased towards one or the other - just use the right OS for the right job. And further to what some people have expressed in this story that this is somehow a plot by IBM to undermine Microsoft - whoo ! what vivid imaginations some people have !
IBM is being prudent in this case, because of the issues they identified with well known applications and their internal applications. I wouldn't be surprised if the are also holding off on the update until some of their internal applications are updated. A large portion of the company probably relys on these applications, and updating would cause too much downtime. They probably identifed the issues with these applications during the SP2 beta cycle, have updated them, and are beginning the process of updating images and rolling them out.
That being said, I'm wondering if we'll start seeing announcements from other companies that are doing the same thing. I'm thinking that HP probably has as many PCs if not more than IBM.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
Every large company has a hold off on SP2 order so their IT staff can hit reload on Slashdot for a week or so to see if any "SP2 sux0rs!!11" stories get posted. If we go 2 weeks without one, expect it to get rolled out.
Another site to check are some of the gaming forums. If it doesn't trash Doom3 and the Slashbots pretending to work don't report problems, it must be OK.
Companies have a difficult balance... testing patches and updates to software to ensure compatibility for their context, while getting patches in place to address vulnerabilities.
Anyways, I need to get back to trying to fix my Windows XP desktop at work. SP2 broke it severely, and I'm not doing a repair re-install of XP for the second time to try to get the damn thing operational again. Good thing I only run Windows in VMWare with Linux as my workstation's core OS ;)
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
You should try to stay INSIDE more often. Why go outside to interact with humanity when there are so many things to read on /.
To "fix" Issue#6. Hold down the left-CTRL key when clicking on the link that is being blocked.
What does this patch do for you?
It fixes alot of well known vulnerabilities, adds some great features to the firewall, adds a popup blocker, and the Security Center provides great support for some well-known virus scanners to make sure users are up to date on virus definitions.
Installed more gooblygook into Windows Media Player that asks for copyright protections etc that I don't want and makes me go through the configuration screen all over again
What gooblygook does it install into WMP? Or do you mean it just makes you go through the configuration screen (where you can just hit Next, Next, Finish - must be difficult). It saved all my previous settings and did not reset anything when I first loaded up WMP. You mention both, but really it doesn't appear to install anything new here - just verifies your previous settings.
Added a popup blocker I didn't want - that I can't easily turn off - into IE - that conflicts with Google Toolbar - instead of one easy click to get a popup on a site that you were expecting to pop up (such as a separate chat window for customer support), you now need to go into the options to turn popup blocking off, then click the google toolbar... twice the hassle.
You can't easily turn off the pop-up blocker? I know thats so hard to go to Tools, Internet Options, Privacy, and then uncheck the "Block Pop-Ups" box. I feel for you man!
So if you deployed a Linux on 10000 machines on all your tech, marketing, IT, sales teams computers, and you had developped specific applications, drivers for some specific devices, and all the crap, you would just tell them: Sure, let's upgrate from 2.4 to 2.6 and cross your fingers?
The fact that they are cautious doesn't mean they distrust SP2. Like any major upgrage to a kernel (to any OS), it is going to break some of your specific devs, would it be only slightly.
This would be true for any OS. The fact that this one is Microsoft doesn't make it something against MS.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
I've used to work for IBM. Remember recieving my laptop (T21), don't recall any special notes on 'not downloading any patches'. OTOH, this patch changes so many things, that I understand why IBM is so paranoid about it. They don't want to deal with all the broken apps.
... Or may be never.
Personally, I'm going to hold on with this patch as well. Why do I need it anyway? When I ru Windows (and I have a dual boot), I only use Mozilla as a browser, have firewall, Active-X tracker, always up to date virus scanner, and several spybot scanners/detectors. So I would rather hold on till, say, the end of this year -- when dust settles down
This seems to be a valid theory!
Doesn't look like the theory is applicable to all cases. You need to create a special exception for Trolls.
Here @ FedEx we tested some SP2 installs and it broke a bunch of our apps. We are also holding out on deploying this service pack to our machines so we can make a custom SP2. I think alot of companies are doing the same. TE
TerminalEcho
* Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft. You can either moderate at face value, or actually read what I have to say first. *
After working for the company for the past two summers as an intern, I've come to know a bunch of people who actually *gasp* work there. I'd say that 1/2 of them are Linux geeks who understand that while Linux is great and all, it will not cure AIDS, feed the poor, or save the whales/children. Neither will Windows. They're fucking OS's that you can either RUN or NOT RUN. Choose one and leave the preaching to the guys in the Vatican. The company is as evil as any other public company who is responsible to their bottom line and their shareholders (that goes for any company, not just software houses). Beyond that, its just a bunch of people who love to code, love what they do, and whether you believe it or not, are pretty fucking good at it (if you don't believe me, go through the interview/hiring process yourself and let me know how it goes).
It's come to the point where after having sat in both the "Microsoft sucks, everything they do is awful, evil, and will bring about a world dictatorship" camp and the "Eh, I'll work there for a bit and see what its like" camp, the only conclusion I can draw is that those who hate Microsoft with a passion, have some sort of underlying motivation for doing so. My whole life I had used Linux exclusively. My whole life I had coded solely in Linux. However, I decided to give it a shot, because I have a *gasp* open mind, and interviewed there. I went in almost viweing the entire experience as a joke, but I left loving the people, loving the campus, having a great time, and wondering whether or not I should consider this more seriously. So while I was being flown out to Seattle on MS's dime (hey, why not fly out to Seattle, all expenses paid for the weekend, even if I don't take the job) the rest of the kids in my CS program were bitching about how evil Microsoft is while at the same time complaining that they had nowhere to work. Unbeknownst to them, and many of the people here, there is this place called the "real world" and RMS's vision of an IP-unencumbered future is not a part of it. Rent, car payments, tuition, and food, are a _major_ part of it, however. Microsoft takes care of these things. Writing free software, for the vast majority of people, certainly does not.
Microsoft is just a software company. That is it. They are not some evil empire obsessed with world domination. They are not the fucking Third Reich. If you don't like them, don't buy their software. Is there any need to go any further than that? Do we really need to devote a front page article to the fact that IBM advised their employees not to upgrade their internal computers to XPSP2? When the newest Linux kernel comes out, do you honestly think that companies with hundreds of thousands of computers in their enterprise deployments tell all end-users to immediately upgrade? How about OS X users? How about ANY OPERATING SYSTEM ON THE PLANET? Regardless of what OS or software package we're talking about, if you have an internal user base of that many people AND you're running custom apps, you're going to advise people to hold off for a bit. Get over yourself.
I had offers from a bunch of companies, many of whom are much more highly respected by the group-think-drunk Slashdot community than Microsoft. Which full time offer did I take? Microsoft. Did they pay me more? Nope. Were their benefits better as a whole? Maybe. Is it the best company you can work for in the software industry if you can get over the "OMG!@# It's Micro$oft and that's evil" ideology that most 12 year old script kiddies hold? Yep.
I have no problem with you being a fan of Linux. I am too. In fact, I'm typing this message on a years-old IBM Thinkpad 600 running Slackware 10.0. However, I ask that just for one second, you take a step back from your own ideology. You can do one of two things. You can either admit that for all its flaws Microsoft makes a bunch of pr
MS released RC1 so that companies can test their internal applications and get themselves ready for the final showdown of SP2. But what they did instead? I guess they were just walking around in IT Dept. and drinking their coffee and browsing slashdot, in the hope that MS gets bankrupted before they release SP2 so IBM guys don't need to patch and fix their internal applications.
In our company of 300 employees, we tested SP2 way back to RC1 and from almost 14 days before , we were totally ready for the final release of SP2.
You should do the same