Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Quietly Releases Windows 2003 SP2

Posted by kdawson on from the long-list dept.

Several readers noted that Microsoft has quietly released 32-bit Windows 2003 Service Pack 2 for download. (The 64-bit edition is still showing as a release candidate on the site.) The installation of SP2 may potentially regress hotfixes that have been deployed previously; Microsoft has released a script to scan for hotfixes that may potentially regress.

5 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. Where's my XP SP2b? by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seriously, I NEED an XP SP2b package (all updates up to IE7).

    I'm not making a comment. I'm asking a serious question here! XP SP2b OEM disks are already being sold in stores.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  2. Re:This is one of the reasons I prefer Debian. by gregleimbeck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is not so much of an issue for me now, but in the past I have had to spend days going through change management to install anything on a server, be it a hotfix, service pack, whatever. I, for one, welcome our big honkin' file overlords.

    --

    P.S.,

    This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated.

  3. Re:This is one of the reasons I prefer Debian. by Lloyd_Bryant · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Also, testing just what could obviously break is a terrible way to test. A read a story about someone, who after upgrading to Linux kernel 2.6 started having random lockups in PHP/Apache. Apples and Oranges. A change to the kernel potentially affects EVERYTHING on the system. Anyone doing a kernel upgrade *should* be retesting everything on the system.

    The issue with MS products is their downright incestuous relationship with each other. An update to IE can potentially affect Word. A patch for a security bug in IIS can cause SQL server to go wacky. The reason that business prefers Service Packs to patches is because they've learned the hard way that if you change ANYTHING on a Windows box, you have to recertify EVERYTHING.
    --
    Don't tell me to get a life. I had one once. It sucked.
  4. Re:What made this release so "quiet"? by Speed+Pour · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To answer that question is simple, it's a server platform. If they did an SP update for XP or Vista (gawd knows they should hurry given all the problems), it would show up on ever web page they have. Since win2k3 was never meant to go to an average consumer, it's just not worth advertising through most mediums.

    If that isn't a good enough answer, just look at the list of what's new...There's nothing of significant value, and all of the security/bug fixes are already addressed with regular critical updates. Who cares about this update? It's a 'value improvement' update at the very most.

    Now for my question...why was this made into a slashdot article? Judging by the number of comments so far, it's clearly not of much interest to anybody...and anybody who's running the os will receive a notification in the next few days anyway.

    --
    - Nobody would know what RTFA meant if it didn't need to be said all the time
  5. x64 Bit Version by NoMoreFood · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "(The 64-bit edition is still showing as a release candidate on the site.)"

    FYI: It may not be showing up on the site, but it's showing up on my wife's computer via Windows Update. (The Windows XP x64 version, at least).