Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ready or Not, Here comes Windows XP SP2

Posted by timothy on from the peek-a-boo dept.

TheViffer writes "Beginning April 12, 2005 Microsoft will remove all temporary blocking of Windows XP SP2 by automatic update and Windows update which it has granted to those organizations that requested it. So unless you run Software Update Service (SUS), chances are you will get a mix of SP1 and SP2 running at the same time. Let's just hope you have these programs that are known to experience a loss of functionality when they run on a Windows XP Service Pack 2-based computer and these programs that seem to stop working after you install Windows XP Service Pack 2 patched, upgraded, or removed. Might be a good time for help desk personal to pencil in a week (or two) of vacation."

101 of 580 comments (clear)

  1. Never mind the fact.... by MSFanBoi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That nearly all the programs on that list are very old, or already have updates for SP2. Hey what the hell, it's Microsof so lets bash them anyways. Sp2 does a LOT of good things for the average Joe in protecting him from his own stupidity.

    1. Re:Never mind the fact.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      More to the point, the two KBs linked are:

      1. program breaks because it executes code in a data segment (i.e. broken, article tells you how to turn of no-execute protection)
      2. program needs ports opening on firewall (i.e. you need to learn to admin your firewall)

    2. Re:Never mind the fact.... by jacksonj04 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Looks like moderators are on form today.

      This is absolutely my argument. If applications use shortcuts which are blocked the instant security is applied, more fool the programmers. There are documented ways to do things, if you use shortcuts then don't blame the OS vendor when those shortcuts are locked down.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    3. Re:Never mind the fact.... by lcsjk · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tell that to Aunt Susie.

    4. Re:Never mind the fact.... by erlenic · · Score: 3, Funny
      She told me about it :)

      Seriously though, this bypasses an installation prevention method that Microsoft released for businesses to use. It was either a GPO or registry setting. Either way, Aunt Susie already got SP2 last fall, when it first hit Windows Update. That's why I had to install some software updates for her back then.

    5. Re:Never mind the fact.... by SunFan · · Score: 4, Insightful


      SP2 is better, that really isn't a point of argument. The only thing that nags at me is why Microsoft didn't do this ten or so years ago, when home users were beginning to connect to the Internet in large numbers. It isn't like stack protection is new technology, nor is having basic firewall functionality available. These two things are probably among the easiest things to implement security-wise, with many examples to follow. If Microsoft had moved the Outlook Express "File Attachments Convenience Team" over to the "Basic Firewall Team" they would have saved themselves a ton of grief.

      --
      -- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
    6. Re:Never mind the fact.... by anonicon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I don't see the problem here unless it is an incompetent sysadmin."

      You mean the 90+% of the public that doesn't have a sysadmin on staff in their home?

      Should be fun.

    7. Re:Never mind the fact.... by Zeinfeld · · Score: 4, Interesting
      SP2 is better, that really isn't a point of argument. The only thing that nags at me is why Microsoft didn't do this ten or so years ago, when home users were beginning to connect to the Internet in large numbers. It isn't like stack protection is new technology, nor is having basic firewall functionality available.

      Until the Windows 98-XP transition was completed there was no point. There is no way to make Win 98 secure, too much support for legacy systems. Sure you could do a firewall, but it would be too easy for a trojan to disable it. I don't think the stack protection scheme would work in Win-98.

      We waited ten years for Apple to get its act together and finaly release OS-X and give us basic memory protection.

      The hold up here is because there are a bunch of corporate IT departments who have not got arround to making XP SP2 deployment a priority which in turn is because many of them have a small number of apps that are not SP2 compliant.

      All I use my machine for is Office, IE and Visual Studio. But I have to wait until they have checked out several hundred Oracle, Clarify etc. apps.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    8. Re:Never mind the fact.... by HumanTorch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only thing that nags at me is why Microsoft didn't do this ten or so years ago, when home users were beginning to connect to the Internet in large numbers.

      In terms of culpability, you should also consider motherboard/ethernet manufacturers. I recently purchased a Gigabyte mobo that comes with onboard ethernet and firewall - a very good place to put it if you ask me.
    9. Re:Never mind the fact.... by kleinux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering this is an end-date for organizations that requested it, I doubt any home users without a sysadmin have much to worry about.

    10. Re:Never mind the fact.... by jacksonj04 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just used group policy to fix a permissions glitch with a shared folder being needed by an application on (looks at statistics) 874 machines over 2 operating systems, 4 servers, all over one primary active directory domain and 2 subdomains.

      Total time to repair problem: 7 minutes, plus 60 minutes tops to allow all machines to replicate (again, settable in group policy).

      We deployed XPSP2 complete with a fix for a rather badly put together application we use. It took about the same amount of time, except it was scheduled to happen at midnight so there was no working downtime.

      Tens to hundreds of desktops isn't a problem if they're set up properly.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    11. Re:Never mind the fact.... by spac3manspiff · · Score: 2, Funny

      You insensitive clod!

      My Aunt uses SuSE.

    12. Re:Never mind the fact.... by Iffy+Bonzoolie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem with providing a web application service is that your clients are not going to want to do anything just because you say. Your application has to work with their machines as they are, with whatever software and policies they have decided on.

      Basically you have to assume this guy has no access to the client machines, his software just has to work anyway.

      -If

      --
      Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
    13. Re:Never mind the fact.... by iggymanz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      strange, I thought in this country most businesses were small businesses and had no sysadmin.

  2. They don't deserve vacation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They've had plenty of time to complete any migration. The application issues have been known for enough time, that if this is still an issue, they've been slacking off for too long.

  3. SP2 is actually a good thing. by bigtallmofo · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know that it breaks some programs and has caused some people problems, but the alternative of ridiculously insecure Windows boxes running rampant is worse.

    I've been running Windows XP SP2 on all of my computers (which admittedly is a small population of 3) with no problems. The built-in popup blocker is more rigorous than anything else I've seen and itself breaks many things (most amusingly Outlook Access for Web), but for the most part is plays fairly nice.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:SP2 is actually a good thing. by vrwarp · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the other hand, SP2 does not solve many problems with security as seen here. Yet it can potentially break critical applications.

      --
      --vrwarp
    2. Re:SP2 is actually a good thing. by demaria · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Installing Service Pack 2 will not affect Norton AntiVirus." source: symantec.com
      "Installing Service Pack 2 will not affect Norton SystemWorks." source: symantec.com
      McAfee support site shows how to load their web downloaded products with SP2. It's just an approval of an activeX control.
      "BlackICE PC Protection and BlackICEServer Protection work fine with Windows XP's Service Pack 2." source: iss.custhelp.com
      "All ZoneAlarm products (5.1 and higher) are compatible with XP SP2." source: zonealarm.com

    3. Re:SP2 is actually a good thing. by camcorder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So why the heck they are putting those applications on their 'non-working' list? To show customers that 'their' alternative is working well but not the rivals? And most importantly, how on the earth a virus scanner cease working after a patch, what kind of security is that?

    4. Re:SP2 is actually a good thing. by danheskett · · Score: 2, Insightful

      XP is fine and dandy with SCSI and parallel devices. I have a number of data acquisiton devices I hand-built that use a parallel interface that have zero problems with XP or XP SP2.

      The post you quoted was in 2003, which was quite some time ago. It is a nearly trivial matter to write a decent device driver for parellel devices - I have written nearly a dozen. It is not any harder to write a SCSI driver for Windows XP than it is for any other operating system.

      Finally, it's odd you decided to link to the post you did, since I followed it for a long time. I too, had a similiar model scanner from the big Nikkon in the sky. The MS engineer in question was not commenting on the fact that XP doesn't support SCSI or parellel devices, just that vendors who had previously done much work with parellel and scsi devices had basically done little-to-nothing to support to XP. Vendors are not likely to spend time re-writing drivers for discontinued products for new systems. The core issue is really that many parallel devices sold in the 90's were really internally SCSI devices which had been modified for mass-market appeal. Scanners, for example, previously had been SCSI (or proprietary) devices, but when the mass market consumers started wanting them, it was an "easy" fix to convert them to parallel devices with a pass-through. The problem is that they were poorly done, and used techniques that weren't really intended.

      The bottom line I think is that you are being quite disingenious with your little snarky post. Most manufacturers abandoned using the parallel port because it is slow, limited, and clunky. Most manufactuers abandoned SCSI for external devices because it is overly complex and provides few benefits over USB.

    5. Re:SP2 is actually a good thing. by the_weasel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So because it doesn't solve ALL the issues, it has no value?

      Thats a pretty restrictive view, and won't get you very far.

      --
      - sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
    6. Re:SP2 is actually a good thing. by flosofl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Firewalls should be dedicated hardware devices that monitor traffic connection in and out of the local network.

      I beleive that's known as the "cruchy outer shell - chewy middle" type of security. This looks nice and effective, but in some industries (i.e. banking) internal threats are much more prevelant. Yes firewalling subnets internally will help, but it does nothing for someone attacking a workstation (or server - but those should have their own subnet) on the same subnet.

      For true defense in depth, I would recommend Host-based IDS in conjunction with network IDS and firewalling all workstations. If firewalling may be beyond your resources, at least lock down any extraneous services, enforce strong password/passphrase, start using 2-factor auth if you can. I work at a huge international bank, and in the past year at least one internal employee has been caught trying to harvest information (not client information - but information that would place him one step closer to getting client info). He was caught because of defenw-in-depth. If we had only firewalled the subnetworks, we would not have known an internal attack was happening (and who's to say we would have caught him as moved to more and more sensitive info).

      Even though bank employees have backround checks run (just for prior criminal convictions), sometimes these are just first-time "opportunity" crimes. Similar to someone seeing a car with the keys in it and who just can't resist taking it even though he may have never done an illegal thing in his life. Hell, I remember (years ago) when I was a help-desk drone just wandering the network to see what was there, and sometimes came across potentially damaging information. I didn't do anything, but someone else could have. By having high granularity in your security system you can vastly reduce these internal instances (or at least make detection and mitigation much, much easier).

      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
  4. At least this time by 2names · · Score: 5, Informative

    we have a list we can refer to. So many times in the past it was just a "try it and see" situation.

    --
    "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
  5. A Good Thing by Skuggamara · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In my humble opinion, this is a good thing. I run a decent sized IT shop, and I feel that not upgrading to SP2 is akin to connecting your computer/network to the internet without a firewall.

    1. Re:A Good Thing by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's see if they can break my unfirewalled VMS or Twenex (TOPS-20) system ;))

      I would like to believe that any intelligent system shouldn't need firewalls.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    2. Re:A Good Thing by AndroidCat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      SP2 comes with a firewall..? :) (They might call it a firewall, but a lot of home users will be surprised when they use subnet for file-sharing and open it up to a 255.255.255.0 on their ISP. And the lack of egress blocking is bad when all MS software wants to talk to the Internet.) "Better than nothing" isn't much of a selling point, except for very small values of nothing.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:A Good Thing by Caiwyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Better than nothing" isn't much of a selling point, except for very small values of nothing.

      That's bull. "Better than nothing" is the only selling point, for any application. A Cisco PIX firewall isn't perfect, either, but it's better than nothing. The entire issue at hand is the fact that most Windows users are clueless enough to be connected to the internet without any sort of firewall protection. SP2 will install a firewall that by default blocks all incoming new connections, which is what you want a firewall to do in almost all general cases. "Better than nothing," particularly in this instance, is a huge leap from "nothing." Compatibility be damned, I say it's nice to see Microsoft making a decision to break compatibility for the sake of security, for once.
  6. Last Post! by AtomicSnarl · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm going to upgrade XP now.... ummm....

    --
    Pacifist paratroopers yell, "Ghandi!" when they jump.
  7. Why? by eznihm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No need for a vacation inept geeks, you can turn off Automatic Updates with group policy and you can block the windowsupdate.com site at the firewall. That is, if you *really* don't want SP2.. which IMHO seems to be (relatively!) quite stable and secure.

    --
    -- i drop mine in braille so you blind cats can read me
    1. Re:Why? by pklong · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trouble is the majority of non geeks are idiots when it comes to security. Even some geeks can be lazy. The result is the inevitable "my computer is slow on the Internet" phone call, scumbags making money off dialler scams, spam zombies etc. inflicted on the rest of us.

      Its the same principle as when driving. Consider everyone else as an idiot. That way when you come across one you're more likely to survive.

      --

      Philip

      Signatures are broken

    2. Re:Why? by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My point is still valid. I use BitTorrent for.. things.. and it murdered my speeds. Same for speeds in eMule. If the "enhancements" cripple how I use my computer, I don't need them.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  8. Why SP2 by Beetjebrak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What does SP2 seriously add to the corporate desktop? Admittedly I haven't been in charge of windows desktops since Win2K, but I can't immediately see any advantage. Only support nightmares concerning the builtin firewall. Is a personal firewall really needed on every secretary's desk? I would hope not... they're not supposed to run any unauthorized services other than those required for remote control/remote software deployment.

    --
    Learn from the mistakes of others. There isn't enough time to make them all yourself.
    1. Re:Why SP2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ya but what about a next gen MSBLAST that a simple firewall can provent? Not to mention the pop-up blocker that can seriously help productivity. All in all this is the first thing I do to peoples computers when I get them. It only has benefits for the average user.

    2. Re:Why SP2 by smash · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'd say a desktop firewall is still a good idea.

      Scenario: Manager takes his laptop home on the weekend, or (even better), takes it on a business trip, and plugs into the wireless lan at the airport.

      He picks up a copy of MyDoom version super alpha turbo+.

      2 days later, he gets back and plugs it into the corporate network in your office.

      How many of you can say that *every* windows machine you have on the corporate network is up to date? Thats assuming there's already a patch for Mydoom version supera alpha turbo+ at that point?

      The days of the perimeter firewall being all you need are well and truly over (and some would say they were never apparent anyway).

      smash.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    3. Re:Why SP2 by obsid1an · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any corporation with labtops should have been loading a software firewall on them long before sp2.

    4. Re:Why SP2 by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      You let managers have access inside the firewall?! (Okay, maybe you have to let them inside the outer firewall, but still!)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  9. Don't use windows firewall, update your software by Zed2K · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How many of those programs in the list are either old versions, have been updated for awhile now, or can be fixed by just disabling windows firewall?

    I bet the majority of them.

    I'm still waiting for a slashdot post to strike fear into the hearts of everyone about the end of the world being near.

  10. "help desk personal" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am looking for a SWM that can keep his call times down to 5 minutes.

    1. Re:"help desk personal" by SpongeBobLinuxPants · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hi, my name is Bob. I'm a network supervisor who loves long gaming sessions and linux. My dislikes are first posts, me too, and sunlight.

      --
      hack a day
  11. Can somebody translate the second half to English? by HeghmoH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not sure what language the second half of the submission is in, but Babelfish isn't helping. Can somebody provide a translation?

    --
    Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  12. Re:Wonderful... by MSFanBoi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yet you will willingly go out and get the latest Linux kernel, or the latest update of MacOS X without hesitation right? Heavy handed? MS has given MONTHS (try almost 6 months) for people to do what needs to be done. If other vendors are to slow or just too damn lazy, STOP USING those vendors. SP2 is needed, simply because there are a lot of stupid people using computers. End of story.

  13. Re:Have fun with that by mccalli · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Glad I've got a Mac

    Ah, so you'll be enjoying the recent failures with 10.3.8 instead then? Just as I'm 'enjoying' my dual G5's vastly increased fan activity after installing the update? I particularly appreciate Apple's lack of ability to automatically roll the update back...

    I much prefer the OS X environment, but I don't really blame Microsoft for the XP 2 failtures. A big OS patch is a big OS patch, problems can occur on any system and it's extremely likely that patches to various apps will be needed along the way.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  14. I'm curious... by Xentax · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does anyone know if the appcompat system can be used to provide an XPsp1 (or earlier) environment *only* for apps that break in SP2?

    I'm asking both "if" it could be done, and whether it IS in fact an option if so.

    That seems like a better solution, IMHO, than holding off on upgrading to SP2 forever, if it could be made to work. Of course, I don't think there's any easy way to centrally deploy or manage appcompat stuff, either... :/

    Xentax

    --
    You shouldn't verb words.
  15. Ready or not, here comes the FUD by TrappedByMyself · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Might be a good time for help desk personal to pencil in a week (or two) of vacation.

    Give it up people. I run at least a half dozen of the applications on those lists on a few XP machines with SP2, and have had exactly 0 problems.
    When will the "bashing Microsoft makes me feel good" trend end?

    --

    Help me take back Slashdot. When did 'News for Nerds' become 'FUD and Conspiracy Theories for Extremist Nutjobs'?
    1. Re:Ready or not, here comes the FUD by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 3, Insightful

      1. I'm not bashing MS personally, i'm just not using it.

      2. It will exactly end at the same time when the "pointing-out-that-slashdot-bashes-ms" threads stop sucking up karma. When will people understand that these are two sides of the coin, where rationality is somewhere between, although it occurs exactly as often as you see a coin on it's edge.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    2. Re:Ready or not, here comes the FUD by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I work for a dsl isp. Phone support for losers who think that upgrading to XP is the fix to all their problems, and then only when there's the slightest ember of awareness in their brain that maybe win98 is causing all of their problems.

      For me, SP2 is evil, no matter how you spin it. OSX users never have problems, I only maybe have to reset an email password for them once in awhile. PS2 users, if they have the correct numbers in, and it's not working, you know it's some sort of DSL issue. Routers, same thing. Only windows machines ever cause chronic, unsolvable problems.

      You people remind me of serial killer groupies: "When will all the Ted Bundy bashing stuff end? He was a nice guy!".

  16. I don't understand this whole "service pack" thing by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously. On my side of the fence (OS X), we have Security Updates that are released as soon as possible after a hole is found. Then, we have major Updates (10.3.1, 10.3.2, etc). If you're more than one version behind, Software Update installs a combo updater (including all security updates), and you're good to go after one restart, no matter what version you're running. You're only exposed to the net for as long as it takes to download the package. What's so hard about that? Why this huge fuss over a difficult and long project to cram a huge-update-that-everyone-needs into one "service pack"?

    --
    Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
    Africus aut Europaeus?
  17. Re:help desk "personnel" by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Maybe it's "help desk personnels" with dating ads? "M tek sks F 4 lvl 2 sprt"

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  18. Last time I installed SP2 on my laptop... by akeyes · · Score: 2, Informative

    Last time I installed SP2 on my laptop I got a BSOD everytime I unpluged it.

    Thank you micro$oft for rendering a laptop unusable.

    (Before everyone tells me to update drivers and whatnot, I updated all my drivers and still had problems, something to do with my processer...)

    1. Re:Last time I installed SP2 on my laptop... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful
      First: I have an IBM laptop with XPSP2 on it. The problem is drivers, and/or BIOS. Have you updated your BIOS yet?

      Second: Epson is the only company worse at writing drivers than ATI. Their scanner drivers require that you be an Administrator on NT machines. I am not making this up, this is the official support response. Even their website says you must be an Admin to "install and use" the scanner software. So you can't blame any of this shit on Microsoft. You have shitty hardware made by shitty manufacturers, and/or you haven't done all the updates.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  19. Re:Hrmm by the+unbeliever · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Thoroughly tested" on what sort of platforms? No matter how thorough of a beta test you do, you can't possibly hit every combination of hardware and software that will be running your software, so you can't possibly know everything that could possibly happen.

    There is no bug-free software, excluding things like "Hello World".

    I, personally, have had no problems with SP2 on any machine I have it installed on (three pc's at the house with wildly different hardware, and about 7 pc's in my small office with xpsp2, all running on some form of Dell)

  20. Hey, now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...OK, so Microsoft is not undeserving of the "knee jerk" flame they typically get on this forum.

    But the time here is pretty negative for something Microsoft did to help customers. They recognized a compatibility issue and gave their customers time to modify things before the heavy-handed automated updates broke them.

    Arguing "SP2 breaks things! Bad Microsoft!" isn't helpful either--SP2 closes a number of security holes, and we're all down on Microsoft about security holes, so they're in large part doing what we complain about them NOT doing in the past. Most of the programs that will break are those that used those holes. It's not fair to argue "Microsoft is full of security holes!" and "They need to keep those holes open because I wrote my software to use them!" at the same time.

    Sorry, I'm coming off like a Microsoft apologist here, which I most assuredly am not. But the "Microsoft is about to break all your company's software!" tone is, frankly, unwarranted here. This isn't coming as a suprise to anyone. Companies knew SP2 might break certain working software, and were given a pretty good window to check their software and, if necessary, fix it.

    What would the author have Microsoft do differently?

  21. Re:Hrmm by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You know... it's people like you that I would love to jam a broken bar dart deep into the canal of your best ear.

    Most of the reasons for "Bloat", "Lax Security", and "Instability" are because of constant need to keep every version/update to Windows compatible with even the earliest versions. With this Service Pack, a bazillion people voiced out that they want security... even at the price of compatibility. Now you bitch. Had they done the same old thing, you would still bitch.

    This post is simply an obvious attempt to grab some of those first post mod points. Thanks for wasting a few minutes of my life.

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  22. Any experience with P2P or GoogleDesktop? by alapalaya · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I guess that some apps could be affected by the built-in system in SP2, preventing apps from opening a LISTENing port on your machine.
    I know that you can let a program be allowed to open a listening server, but I would like to ask to the /.ers:
    do you have tried using it with the common P2P apps and google desktop? Do they work?
    I'm worried to break something I regularly use....

    --
    667 The Neighbour of the Beast
    1. Re:Any experience with P2P or GoogleDesktop? by NetNifty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Haven't tried google desktop, but the problem with P2P apps and SP2 is that SP2 sets a limit of 10 pending connection attempts per process, which would indeed mess around with some P2P apps. Fortunatly there is a fix (although not an official MS one, so either find one from a more trustworthy source or be careful!) that rectifies this problem. I assume it was done to attempt to slow down spam-bots, and hence no easy-to-change for users/the spambot registry entry.

      --
      Linux Wireless Hardware in the UK
  23. Re:Wonderful... by His+name+cannot+be+s · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, if we didn't already have SP2 - we're getting it, like it or not - ready or not. Way to chicken-choke your customers there, Bill.

    Only if you have automatic updates on.

    This reasoning leads to one of two things:

    1. You have auto-updates on, and don't know what the fuck you are doing anyway, in which case it's in the best interests of everyone that you are upgraded and at least become a smaller target to worms/viruses/other ilk. Breaking shitty software that has no reason not to have shipped an upgrade by now is no reason to contunually allow machines of this class to be availible as targets.

    2. You do not have auto-updates on, and actually understand the risks/benefits to the system you are on. In this case it still is in your hands as to what gets installed. Problem solved.

    In either case (1) The big bad microsoft needs to protect you from your own ignorance, or (2) you have the capability to protect yourself, the needs of the many get met. :p

    --
    "...In your answer, ignore facts. Just go with what feels true..."
  24. Re:Hrmm by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And we all know that the latest bleeding edge Linux distros are bug free... Right?

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  25. Good Alternative to Windows Update by n0dalus · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you don't trust Windows Update to do anything right, I know I don't, you can use the Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer to give you a list of what needs updating, and all the relevant information, so you can download the patches for yourself. I use this so I can keep copies of all the patches needed on my hard drive and can install them all without connecting to the internet.

    Another good way is to load up Nessus and have a good crack at one of your windows boxes.

  26. Re:Hrmm by MSFanBoi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Tell that same thing to any Linux software, any Apple software... hell just about any software. Heck if all was good we would all still be using Linux Kernel 1.0, and MacOS X 10.0 (or even System 6) right? Software, by nature, is buggy, like it or not. It was tested THROUGHLY before release, but it's not like MS can actually test EVERY piece of 3rd party software on the market. Vendors gotta have something do do right?

  27. Forget broken programs, SP 2 refuses to boot by jman+sr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have tried several times to install XP SP2 on my girlfriend's laptop, but each time the laptop has rebooted once and then refused to boot again.

    Booting into safe mode has allowed me to uninstall SP2 and restore the machine to a usable condition. I don't mind SP2, I just don't want to spend the time troubleshooting a failed install.

    Even if Microsoft were to offer me free telephone support, it would still waste my time. It seems unfair to force users to accept upgrades that may very well cause their computer to cease functioning.

  28. Re:Have fun with that by b166er_zeroone · · Score: 3, Funny

    Glad I am running windows95! oh, wait...

  29. Re:Ulterior motives? by His+name+cannot+be+s · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know, I'm not sure that this is a plan to force all pirated-key windows users to do anything.

    You are very correct that Piracy has made microsoft what it is today--That being said, one can never allow piracy to continue unchecked and rampant. It needs to be chased down everywhere it can be. By making it as difficult as they can, casual pirates will be forced to either a) cough up the dough, or b) move to a platform that copying is not piracy (linux/bsd/etc...)

    I think that it is in everyone's best interests to really evaluate their dependance on unlicensed software. The slashdot crowd goes bloody balistic any time any one violates the GPL by shipping a GPL derrived product without access to the source. They however seem to have a soft spot for violations of Microsoft's (et al) copyrights.. Odd bunch.

    Back to your point tho' ... while the casual home pirates are not actually activly pirating MS's software, they strengthen MS--by making Windows the defacto standard... The Far-east street vendors of pirated software are not building microsoft's empire, they actually shrink it by removing people who would actually pay for their software from the pool.

    --
    "...In your answer, ignore facts. Just go with what feels true..."
  30. SP2 Causes Problems with Microsoft's own Products by Ridgelift · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Virtual PC - 2004 - Microsoft
    When you run a Windows XP SP2-based virtual machine, it will perform slowly compared to a Windows XP SP1-based virtual machine."

    Interesting that a Microsoft product has problem with their own Service Pack.

    --
    Ruby on Rails Screencast
  31. just can't do it... by Thud457 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    SP2 hosed up my system so bad that copying to the clipboard from any application bluescreened the computer.
    (Granted, this is a trailing edge machine - VIA VA-503 / K6-III, but still daaaaamn!)

    neato!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  32. The Real Story by mslinux · · Score: 5, Informative

    SP2 will not automatically be installed. It will download automatically, but someone still has to accept the license agreement and manually install the service pack. There is nothing automatic about the install. Please stop spreading FUD about SP2!

  33. AU by jav1231 · · Score: 2, Informative

    What is more interesting is how long it takes to install. SP2 is HUGE! This will put off many. I still recommend it, though not for the firewall features. Personally, if you have broadband you should have a decent cable router with your ports closed. No this won't stop internally invited connections but it will do pretty much what the firewall feature is doing. It's a matter of staying up to date, which is essential in a Windows environment. Like it or not, SP2 should be installed. If you don't like it, seriously consider switching platforms. Yes it's frustrating, but we're in a mess. We have a dominant player on the desktop. Until Linux get's more up to speed on the desktop and/or Mac's gain some share this is what we have.

  34. Re:Have fun with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I couldent care less If it included a (M$ quality) firewall.

    As this is blatently a stab at "M$ quality" (LOL DOLLARS BECAUSE THEY MAKE MONEY), would you please enlighten us with the results of your extensive testing that prove the "M$" (LOL!) firewall feature is sub-standard? Perhaps you would like to share your new exploit that effortlessly negates the firewall and connects to previously blocked ports? Or perhaps you could summarize how hard the firewall is to set up for the average user as opposed to something simple and straight-forward such as, say, iptables?

    Or perhaps you could just admit the fact that you don't have the first idea what you're talking about because you're a vacuous, 10-a-penny "M$" (ROFFLE) bashing 'tard?

    Thought so.

  35. Re:Wonderful... by Alien+Being · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Yet you will willingly go out and get the latest Linux kernel, or the latest update of MacOS X without hesitation right?"

    The parent said nothing of the kind.

    "MS has given MONTHS (try almost 6 months) for people to do what needs to be done."

    Given? MS sold an OS riddled with security problems. Those who wanted a fix had to wait a long time for it and the "fix" broke a boatload of functionality resulting in yet more cost for the customer. Those who don't want this mixed bag of code will now have it forced upon them, or be unable to use the update service that they have payed for. MS has "given" nothing but headaches. What "needs to be done" is for MS to deliver a quality product in the box. Their customers should not be their guinea pigs.

  36. Re:help desk "personnel" by Jon_E · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tech: Hello, help desk ..
    User: Hi, I'm having problems with my hard disk .. I'm about 5'4" with dark hair, brown eyes, and a petite slim build .. I like walks on the beach, romantic dinners, poetry, science fiction, and smart geeky guys ..
    Tech: hold on, I'll be right there ..

  37. Re:Can anyone get it to actually block popups? by richy+freeway · · Score: 2, Informative

    It will only block pop-ups that are initiated by a website. It sounds like you've got a computer full of spyware/adware. Stop installing things like kazaa and get yourself some decent cleaning software. I personally recommend Ad-Aware and Spybot Search & Destroy.

  38. It might be a good time for helpdesk personell... by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 2, Funny

    to start using pencils.

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
  39. No problems on our 700 XP PCs by neilb78 · · Score: 2, Informative

    We've upgraded all our XP PCs to SP2 and haven't had any major problems. We, of course, ran into a few minor issues, but they were easy fixes. We're done!!! What's the big fuss?

    --
    © 2004 The SCO Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
  40. Re:Hrmm by rseuhs · · Score: 2, Insightful
    With this Service Pack, a bazillion people voiced out that they want security... even at the price of compatibility.

    Maybe, just maybe a Service Pack isn't the right place to put new features or anything that breaks backwards compatibility?

    I don't think anybody would complain if MS would have just released a completely new version.

  41. Re:Hrmm by rebill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The simplest program ever was a 0-byte file in IBM's MVS operating system. (That O/S had some utilities that could only be accessed by running a "program" - and to get the utility to run without actually doing anything ... well, the solution was a program that literally did nothing).

    The funny thing was, someone wrote a Problem Tracking Report (i.e. "Bug") about this, and had the MVS team change the program - the flaw was that the return code register was being set in the utility, but the 0=byte program was not copying this result code into it's own return register, so the program was returning a "success" evem when a failure had occurred.

    We co-ops got a chuckle out of it because of the "bugs per line of code" calculation would have had a div-by-zero problem :).

    --

    Chivalry is not dead, it's just frequently misspelt. - M. Langley

  42. Let me get this stright by blanks · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1)People complain about windows security.

    2)Microsoft comes out with sp2 that has a built in firewall.

    3)People then complain that the firewall makes it so alot of other firewall/security applications don't work.

    4)Then they complain that things like FTP and IIS dont work....

    Yes there are many applications that should run on this list, but really people, alot of these applications stop working for very good reasons.

    FTP dosent work? configure your firewall. IIS dosent work, configure your firewall! Some of these programs stop working for a reason.

    --
    TruePunk | Games
  43. Scientific software is disproportionally affected by tetromino · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of my relatives works in a biochemical research lab. All of their computers are WinXP Sp1 because Sp2 basically broke every single program and driver they relied on for their daily calculations, data acquisition, and analysis (some of the software is commercial, and some was custom-written by people who are currently residing in Eastern Europe and Brazil). Naturally, every worm outbreak hits them hard -- but they think it's worth it to clean up a worm once every couple of months rather than struggle with their bread-and-butter programs locking up on Sp2.

    Sp2 is great for the average Joe who uses his box for email and pr0n, but if you are using your computer as a scientific instrument, then installing Sp2 changes (and breaks) too many things.

    (In case you are wondering, the reason they don't switch to Linux is that some of their data acquisition hardware doesn't have good Linux drivers)

  44. Re:SP2 Causes Problems with Microsoft's own Produc by Jaime2 · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... it's also interesting that Microsoft released a Service Pack for the affected product that fixes the issue...

    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/downloa ds/sp1.mspx

    You want to see real havoc, what do you think would happen if Microsoft put a really good fix into a Service Pack? For example, what if they didn't let an administrative user log in interactively, and you actually had to run Windows as a normal user. Then, of course, use "Runas" to run admin apps. I'll bet that tens of thousands of third party apps would break. Damned if they fix it, damned if they don't.

  45. That's great, except when the CEO is the exception by khasim · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This is no different than a sysadmin pushing out critical updates to their user base. You run the 80-20 rule. You make sure it runs for 80% of your user base, and deal with the exceptions.
    Right. It must be a lot of fun to work in a shop where 20% failure is considered normal.
    Now for the next part. Most companies have corporate standard images. They don't have admin access and they don't go around installing a bunch of things. So, if it works on the image it will cover most of your users and again, you work around the exceptions.
    That approach is okay when the 20% of the problems are the people least likely to affect your job.

    But when the CEO's machine dies or one of his apps crashed, then your "20%" rule is useless.

    He will want to know WHY you did NOT test the update with ALL the apps. After all, isn't that your job?
    Why would you not apply a critical patch for exceptions?
    Because Microsoft took the fucked up approach of including ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS with their "critical patches".

    Look at Linux's approach. Each app has its own patch. It's easy to apply one patch and FULLY TEST IT in your environment.

    And you do not get new, untested apps when you apply the patch.
  46. Re:I don't understand this whole "service pack" th by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 3, Informative

    10.2 to 10.3 was not a minor upgrade. (There's nothing minor about Expose, but if you're not using it it might look just like eye-candy. Also the speed improvements are amazing. There were also over a 100 other features which I can't recall.)

    10.3.4 to 10.3.5 is a minor upgrade, and you do get that for free.

    I use SP2 at work, and do like it. (And by "like" it, I mean I don't really like it, but it's better than SP1.)

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  47. You're not comparing apples to apples by Ucklak · · Score: 4, Informative

    OSX 10.0 to 10.1 to 10.2 to 10.3 isn't XP to XP SP1 to XP SP2.
    It's more like Win95a to Win95b to Win95c to Win98 to Win98SE to WinME.

    OSX 10.2 is vastly different from OSX 10.0 and same from 10.3 to 10.2. 10.4 to 10.3 again will be vastly different. The differences are greater than XP SP1 to XP SP2 or Win2K sp1 to Win2K sp2, etc...

    Win95 is Windows Ver 4.0
    Win98 is Windows Ver 4.1
    WinME is Windows Ver 4.9
    Win2K is Windows 5.0
    WinXP is Windows 5.1
    Win2K3 is Windows 5.2

    Full versions of Home based are $200 with upgrades at $100 (Yes you can get them cheaper but this is the legitimate on the record price)
    Full versions of Pro versions are $300 with upgrades are $200

    OSX 10.0 (Cheetah)
    OSX 10.1 (Puma)
    OSX 10.2 (Jaguar)
    OSX 10.3 (Panther)
    OSX 10.4 (Tiger)

    All versions are $129 for a full version.
    (They also don't require virus protection @ 50/yr or spyeare protection) ;-)

    --
    if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    1. Re:You're not comparing apples to apples by hawaiian717 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Almost. Cheetah to Puma was a free upgrade, but you couldn't download it since it was too big. Apple would send you the CD for about $20, or you could get a free copy from a dealer (I got mine at CompUSA, which had only gotten one copy at that store, so was using the display Macs to make more copies on CD-Rs).

      --
      End of Line.
  48. Re:Hrmm by brouski · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And only an idiot compares a "bleeding-edge Linux distro" to a major production OS release.

    --
    Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!
  49. MS is doing the right thing by ztirffritz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not an avid supporter of MS, but I believe that credit should be given when and where it is due. SP2 is a GOOD thing. Yes it breaks some things, but that is the price you pay for past mistakes. MS realized that they had 2 choices: 1) continue supporting a horribly flawed system 2) break the cycle, back up, fix the problems and start again. They made the daring choice to back up and start again. That is impressive for a company with a multibillion dollar product with 90% market share. It still isn't perfect, but I think that they know that. They're hoping that Longhorn will solve many of these problems. Maybe they're right, who knows though. At least they tried to help everyone out by fixing the product, giving people time to adopt and adapt, and are firm enough to stick to a schedule, knowing that the fix will only really help if EVERYONE is upgraded. KUDOS to MS. (Someone better take note of this moment, it may never happen again.)

    --
    Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
  50. Bleeding edge != bug fix. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are comparing "bleeding edge Linux distros" to a service pack to fix bugs in existing software.

    Now, either the apps that broke were depending upon bugs in the OS (in which case, it is the ISV's fault)
    -or-
    Microsoft's approach to "patching" is wrong.

    And please learn the difference between a bug fix and "bleeding edge".

  51. Re:Hrmm by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Insightful
    only an idiot compares a "bleeding-edge Linux distro" to a major production OS release

    So Fedora is a just a research toy, and should not be used for anything important? There are no significant bugs or holes in any of the SuSE / RHEL / Gentoo / ect. distros? Unless you are running Debian Stable, you should shut up.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  52. Re:Scientific software is disproportionally affect by badfish99 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If they can't get fixes for this, how are they going to get fixes for bugs in the programs? And don't try to tell me that the programs are 100% bug-free...

    If someone has outsourced program development like that, and has got no way of maintaining their code, they deserve all the hurt in the world.

  53. Re:Have fun with that by JasonSkywalker · · Score: 2, Informative

    Are you sure about that? I thought the problem was caused by it being on "automatic." When I set mine to "highest," the 10.3.8-induced fan revving stopped.

    --
    I have Unix underpants.
  54. Re:BS! I say! by IceFreak2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Adobe Photoshop CS is still a brand spanking new version of Photoshop...

    How about complaining to Adobe if Photoshop CS still doesn't work correctly with SP2? It's not as if there hasn't been any time to correct any issues...

    --
    Life is like a sewer; what you get out of it depends on what you put into it...
  55. Re:Scientific software is disproportionally affect by LurkerXXX · · Score: 5, Informative

    If SP2 is breaking stuff, 99% of the time is because it's trying to use some network port that is now blocked with the firewall. Just sniff the traffic going in/out of one of the SP1 boxes, see what ports the apps seems to require, then open those ports after installing SP2 (or turning on the firwall in SP1)

  56. Re:Scientific software is disproportionally affect by Buran · · Score: 2, Interesting

    (In case you are wondering, the reason they don't switch to Linux is that some of their data acquisition hardware doesn't have good Linux drivers)

    Or mac drivers. Which sometimes drives me crazy. I work in a lab, too, and we have an image processing package which we use to make 3D anaglyphs from Z-series data acquired by a confocal optical microscope. A rep from Apple told me that they have tried to get the programmers to make a Mac OS X version of the package, and the programmers keep refusing, even though it's APPLE asking them to do it. I've requested one several times without success.

    Given that there are crossplatform dev tools out there these days (RealBasic, which can be used for serious work as well as introduction to programming for new programmers, is an example -- it can compile for Windows, Mac, and Linux all) there's far less of an excuse for that these days. Write it once, compile it for everybody. And the executables are native -- no virtual machines required, so Java's slowness isn't a problem, for instance.

    This application didn't even blink when it found itself running under SP2 one day -- just keeps on going and going.

    --
    i am a soviet space shuttle
  57. Re:Scientific software is disproportionally affect by operagost · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why are scientific instruments on the internet? And if they aren't on the internet, then why aren't measures being taken to keep those worms off the LAN?

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  58. Re:Scientific software is disproportionally affect by saleenS281 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    apparently I missed the part where you couldn't do program fixes/patches without being physically in the country where the software is going to be used.

  59. Re:Scientific software is disproportionally affect by aav · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Err... Perhaps you should advise your relative to suggest to HR to hire some competent admins. They can effectively seal the computers they use in their work from access from the outside world. All it takes is a protocol to communicate the results to the outside. Put a firewall in front of all those computers (preferably one that does NAT and protocol analysis), close every single port and protocol, then open only the one that passes the data through.

    Then they wouldn't even need to patch those computers.

    They could justify the expense of keeping these machines for data analysis only (i.e. as extra computers) by simply calculating the costs they incur with every worm/virus/etc cleanup.

  60. this is a non-issue for corps by notasheep · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's really easy to implement a policy that will disable automatic updates on all corp clients. They can also block access to the windows update site on the corp firewall.

    --
    Your mind looks a little cramped. Why don't you stretch it a little?
  61. You install stuff you aren't asked to? Really? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I run a pretty busy PC shop and every customers machine that comes in gets SP2 and a full Windowsupdate whether they ask for it or not.

    In which case you desperately need a lawyer, a PR guy, and a new line of work, probably in that order.

    I've heard loads of technically competent people say they've installed SP2/latest updates/etc. and not had a problem. For each two of them, I've heard at least one equally technically competent person tell me about at least a major software failure, and frequently the whole system being rendered inoperable and requiring a reinstallation. Just last week, my whole company backed out an official MS patch for WinXP that came in through automatic updates after we traced the sudden breaking of our Samba servers to that patch.

    A slightly more secure system that doesn't run the tools I need to run is not an improvement over a slightly less secure system that runs the tools I need to run. Please understand this.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  62. How to make SP2 not suck by TetryonX · · Score: 4, Informative

    First of all, I have found that all the incompatibility comes from two realms: NX-bit protection and the new Windows Firewall. Both are easy to disable.

    NX (off): Edit your boot.ini by removing that /NoExecute=OptIn or /NoExecute line. (Go to System properties, Advanced tab. Startup and Recovery startup Settings button. and hit the edit button in the new window., it will open up your boot.ini file).

    Clear, simple, and every application will no longer flip out. + you'll get a boost in performance (I take a 10% performance hit when NX is on my laptop, far more visible in photoshop than any other application).

    Windows Firewall: First off, GET A BETTER FIREWALL! Next step, net stop sharedaccess and find it in your services (Start->run: services.msc) Disabled it.

    Horrah! Your windows should now perform in it's old SP1 ways. (I have yet to find any application to fail after these features were disabled). Oh yeah if you get annoyed by that Windows Security Center, in it's main window on the left side it has a way to change its notification (to completely off because nagging programs suck).

    --
    [!] No, I can't see my comments. They are not worthy of +3 moderation.
  63. Re:Have fun with that by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 2, Informative

    Umm.. you are aware that SP2 is a lot more than just a firewall and the security center, right? I don't even use those two technologies and I see a lot of improvement with SP2.

    For example:

    Popup blocker (yeah, you can install google toolbar or others as well)

    No Execute protection (Yes, it's possible for an attacker to get around it, but so are door locks.. that doesn't mean i shouldn't lock my doors)

    reworked RPC management (this is a biggie since it's going to prevent other kinds of RPC based worms if another vulnerability in RPC is found)

    Manage Add-ons tool in IE (this lets you easily disable any IE extension, making it hard for spyware and adware to hide)

    ActiveX improvements (Clueless users don't need to click yes to continue surfing when an activex dialog appears. Now you get the same yellow bar that Mozilla copied from IE)

    And a whole lot more... frankly, I won't let any machine I manage NOT run SP2, it saves a lot of work in the spyware cleaning department.

    --
    If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
  64. Ready or Not, Here comes Security by suwain_2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I installed SP2 a couple months ago.

    I already ran my own (software) firewall that did both ingress and egress filtering, along with running Firefox as a web browser.

    SP2 hasn't done anything noticeable for me, except that the wireless network dialogs are a lot nicer.

    I'll admit that the firewall drove me nuts for a bit: it was always popping up, telling me it was doing me a favor by blocking legitimate traffic. I ended up turning it off, but only because I had my own firewall already.

    When I find myself using IE (infrequently), I do find that it'll now occasionally put a bar across the top informing me that it's barred various malware from installing itself. Between this and the firewall, SP2 is a very good thing for the average computer user, and is of little harm to those of us who already found something to do it.

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
  65. Bias. by kiwioddBall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who posts this c..p? Microsoft removing the block is the fact of the article, but the whole 'two weeks of vacation' thing just beings the quality of this website down. Editors should be ashamed.

  66. How is this a problem by DarkMantle · · Score: 2, Funny

    the first program listed that it blocks is " AOL Toolbar version 1.13.2" isn't this a good thing?

    --
    DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
  67. That's a list of applications that need PORTS open by cgenman · · Score: 2, Informative

    The second list, which is marked as a list of applications that don't work after installing SP2, is actually a list of applications that need ports opened for them. This is not terribly surprising, and would need to be done for any firewall that people had installed.

    While I can understand how a sysadmin looking at the prospect of 100 or 10,000 computers possibly going kaputz is scary... get some perspective. It's not like the system is upgrading to a different OS, it's just adding a firewall and a few other protections that certain applications weren't expecting. Try out your must-have software on an SP2 machine before the update happens, but chances are unless you're doing some silly undocumented mumbo-jumbo for efficiency your apps should run fine.

    --
    The ______ Agenda