Ready or Not, Here Comes Service Pack 2
I_am_Rambi writes "On Tuesday, April 12, Microsoft will turn off the blocking feature that has made it possible for some enterprises to block Windows XP Service Pack 2 downloads by employees who use Automatic Update. That means in companies that used the blocking tool, SP2 will be downloaded automatically to desktop computers that use Windows' Automatic Update feature." An anonymous reader adds "Microsoft has published a list of known software that will not work with Service Pack 2. Most of the software will either not run or will display a blue screen of death during installation of the software or when you start up your computer." That may be why, as ErichTheWebGuy writes, "In a survey of PCs at 251 businesses in the U.S. and Canada, asset tracking company AssetMetrix of Ottawa found that only 24 percent of the systems running Windows XP had been upgraded to Service Pack 2."
I have some sympathy for Microsoft here. If they don't force this patch, they're damned for perpetuating known security issues. If they do, they're damned for being bullies and for breaking compatibility with older applications.
Given the choices they're facing, I have to admit this seems reasonable: a few months for businesses to make the move on their own, after which they flip the switch so anyone on Automatic Update receives the patch.
You complain when the OS has too many bugs, you complain that there are too many patches and hotfixes, you complain when MS decides to roll them all into an SP, you complain when it available for download, and you complain when its mandated.
... you can't have it both ways ...
I know this post will probably be karmically pounded, but in all honesty
"This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
Is it just me, or do most people stop reading a post once OSX is mentioned?
:)
I read the first paragraph, then started the second one and BOOM! OSX fanboy alert! I didn't even bother to look at the next sentence. Then I realized my behavior was instinctual, and went back to question it... and indeed, the rest of the post was a rant about BWJones' lust for Steve Jobs' anal cherry. Now I see why I act that way.
Sorry BWJones, I know you're a really active poster
my blog
Some of us are running OSes other than Windows on x86 hardware, believe it or not. :-)
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
SP2 is only available as a large monolithic patch, which means it's an all-or-nothing proposition.
If they were to break the patch up into various smaller patches against individual areas of the OS, the chances are good that most of them would work at a given site.
It's the overly-simplistic approach that Microsoft takes to system fixes that helps to cause this type of problem...
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
So for people who are stuck using specific windows software, sure, you're going to have issues. But for pretty much everything besides games and CAD, there's really nothing that you can't do on OS X.
No, no, no.
Most business users who use Windows do so because they have one or two vertical market apps that require Windows. PERIOD.
These are places like doctors offices, lawyers offices, misc. professionals, trucking dispatch offices, printing companies, all those thousands of businesses which uses millions of PCs.
They shop for an entire system - server, workstations, printers - etc. My wife works with such a company. A quote from them covers everything you need - all the software, servers, hardware, printers, all of it - and gives you one bottom line price. And they get Windows!
This is how Windows is sold. Everytime this company makes a sale, Microsoft makes 100. The app in question integrates with Office, Small Business Server, Exchange, and SQL Server. The product they sell is not a piece of software, it is an integrated package to solve a real world problem.
There is no equivalent for this in the Mac, Linux, or alternative platform world.
There are lots of reasons - but if you can't find alternatives for things like ISA Server, SQL Server, Commerce Server, Content Management Server, Systems Management Server" that will run on a *NIX you're reading the wrong web site.
.\.\att Clare
In any case, I know Mac users who do realize Apple is fallible, but they are rare and you probably won't find them on /.
I prefer Macs because I have experience with both PCs and Macs. Macs are better machines. It has nothing to do with zealotry; I've tried both, and found the differences to be substantial enough to warrant "switching."
If that makes me a zealot, then so be it.
You complain when the OS has too many bugs, you complain that there are too many patches and hotfixes, you complain when MS decides to roll them all into an SP, you complain when it available for download, and you complain when its mandated.
You hit the nail on the head exactly.
Personally, I'll stop complaining when:
1. The OS runs ZERO listening services by default.
2. The browser is not only NOT a default part of the OS, but refuses to run executable content.
3. The media player is not only NOT a default part of the OS, but refuses to run executable content.
4. The email client is not only NOT a default part of the OS, but refuses to run executable content.
At that point, quite frankly I couldn't care less about bugs, patches, service packs, or automatic updating. Because there would be no need for any of it. Those 4 issues above cover pretty much every critical Windows update in the past umpteen years.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
"Most the games at the store that are made for Windows are (mostly) also made for Mac."
Bullshit. I recently went game shopping with my cousin for his Mac. We went to a Mac store in L.A.. A big Mac store. It barely had half an aisle of games, a lot of them 2 years old. Despite the fact that he had only a handful of games to begin with, he still left the store disappointed. This is in stark contrast to going somewhere like Best Buy and having 2 or 3 aisles of 6 months old or newer games. I think what you really mean to say is "a few of PC's most popular titles have made it to Mac. Occasionally they even happen within a year of the original release date."
"Besdies, computers are meant for work."
Wrong. Computers are meant to do whatever you want them to do. It would be a waste of money to spend $2k on a machine and not have any fun on it. (Conversely, it'd be a waste of money to spend 2K on it and do nothing but play games.)
"You want to play games than I'd suggest a PS2."
Correction: If you want to play a certain selection of genres, get a PS2. If you want to play FPS multiplayer or MMORPG, a PS2 isn't going to do you a lot of good.
Indisputably, PCs are far more general purpose machines than Macs. Some of this claim is based on technical specs, some of it is based on the way the market works, and some if it is based on the wide variety of people with varied needs. (including the desire to have a huge game library.)
Note to Mods: Just to be clear, this is not intended as an insult to Macs. Think about what I've actually stated before knee-jerk modding my comment as flamebait.
"Derp de derp."
What makes you believe you can't block the update? Just turn off Automatic Updates. If you have a large network to manage you can just add a group policy to enforce the change on all of your client desktops.
It's not that difficult and they've given folks plenty of notice about this change.
In terms of applications that get broken by SP2, considering that there are thousands of programs that run on Windows XP the list of affected apps is impressively small.
BTW, I run the latest version of Photoshop on my XP SP2 box with no problems at all. What broke for you?
Your mind looks a little cramped. Why don't you stretch it a little?