Advertisement

(4 replies) #1 Posted by Trix on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:37

i'm sure its still possible to not install it isnt it? if they can force the install of sp2 they can force the install of anything!

#1.1 Posted by Jugalator on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:05

Well, you can deactivate the Windows Update service of course. But then you won't get any existing or upcoming critical security fixes either, so you might end up as a victim of some upcoming nasty host-to-host virus a la Blaster.

#1.2 Posted by figgy on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:05

Yeah, the article title is inaccurate.
If you turn off Automatic updates SP2 will not install by itself.

#1.3 Posted by PeterF on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:42

Indeed. It should better have been called something like:
"Microsoft turns off SP2 install prevention"

#1.4 Posted by shao on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:51

what do you expect from a site that appears to be vetting all comments, and only publishing negative ones? remind me never to visit aunty spam again, along with inq, and zdnet. :-)

(7 replies) #2 Posted by pork-bun on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:39

What will happen if I refuse to update my WinXP?

#2.1 Posted by virtorio on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:50

Bill Gates will send some Hired Goons around to "rough you up".

#2.2 Posted by SecretAgentMan on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:07

I hate when that happens.

#2.3 Posted by Amnesia888 on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:25

lol

#2.4 Posted by MegaManXcalibur on 22 Feb 2005 - 17:57

Its worse when they kill one of your family pets as a warning.

#2.5 Posted by skinnyjm on 23 Feb 2005 - 02:58

Now...would Billy Gates, the former "party dude", ever really want to kill anything?
Other than maybe a keg or a fatty...

#2.6 Posted by 8-n-1 on 23 Feb 2005 - 17:57

Sure he would. Apple and Linux come easily to mind.

#2.7 Posted by Ahnteis on 23 Feb 2005 - 18:15

You computer will be more likely to be hacked.

(4 replies) #3 Posted by [SKM-Industries] on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:41

so, let me get this straight, on the april 12th, i connect to the internet, MS forrces the 'update' to SP2? regardless of the factr that i have disabled automatic updates, and have both a hardware, and software firewall?

what about the applicationas that aren't compatible with sp2?

#3.1 Posted by figgy on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:14

Almost every incompatible app I know has updates for fix their problems with SP2.

#3.2 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:48

Automatic updates off = No SP2
April 12th = The day people using auto-update with a special anti-SP2 patch are bothered to install it.

#3.3 Posted by Trix on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:11

so were is this patch you talk about? i have SP2 but i still think i would like to have this just incase i ever need it

#3.4 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:30

No, it was for SP1 and pre-SP1 users who didn't want SP2 to begin with.

(14 replies) #4 Posted by statm1 on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:41

Excuse my language but )%*#%*(_#...lol Microsoft cant have the right to force me to do anything that i dont wanna do on my own computer... I paid for every inch of this computer and including the MICROSOFT license for windows.. That gives me the right to install spam willingly if I want to... damn it..lol I have SP1.. and I have used SP2 enough to know that I dont want it... It bugs the living crap outta me.. I like SP1 just like it is.. and Ive been using SP1 for years and my computer is still kicking apparently Im doing something right... I will do everything in my power to keep getting updates and to keep SP1... Period..

#4.1 Posted by clonk on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:53

You are aware you can turn of every single added feature that SP2 offers, right?

#4.2 Posted by statm1 on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:57

Its not the features.. I want to block ... SP2 changes things that you cant just turn off....and change back to SP1 or earlier..

#4.3 Posted by TwoTailedFox on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:29

This is what I don't get.


I have been using SP2 since Beta build 2055, missing just three leaked builds (2138, 2142, and 2179). SP2 is stable, useable, and with the update hotfixes issued since it's completion, much has improved.

I myself turn off the Security Center's Antivirus and Firewall Alerts, and switch off the Windows Firewall. SP2 also includes DEP, a useful feature for the future. Directx 9.0c, Windows Media Plater 9.0, Windows Movie Maker 2.1, and IE 6 SP2 are also included.

#4.4 Posted by mrbester on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:53

QUOTE

you can turn of every single added feature that SP2 offers

You can't reenable the get-around-the-dire-crap-that-is-IE-fix-for-dotted-borders-using-XBM-in-javascript that worked for all versions of IE until XP2 came along.

#4.5 Posted by amanechoir on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:07

QUOTE

.. That gives me the right to install spam willingly if I want to...

Nobody gives you the right to screw up other people not to mention, the interweb.

#4.6 Posted by SiDEBURNS on 22 Feb 2005 - 14:17

Please tell me how it "It bugs the living crap outta me"? The only thing I can think of is the security centre, which for good reasons does bug you because your machine would be put at risk if you dont.

Microsoft is not forcing yo install the update and anyway, its a free update. Microsoft dont have to provide it in the first place. Nor did they have to provide SP1 which you seem to be so fond of.

#4.7 Posted by markjensen on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:33

statm1,

Perhaps you need to re-read your Microsoft Windows EULA. In particular, in section 7:

QUOTE

You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.

#4.8 Posted by werejag on 22 Feb 2005 - 19:10

Microsoft is forcing you to install the update and anyway, its doesnt matter if its a free update.

get your facts right man microsoft is forcing something some might not want.

this is our pcs not microsoft's , this is our install of an os not microsoft's.

#4.9 Posted by threedaysdwn on 22 Feb 2005 - 19:33

Actually it's Microsoft's software that you license the use of.

#4.10 Posted by statm1 on 23 Feb 2005 - 00:37

QUOTE

statm1, Perhaps you need to re-read your Microsoft Windows EULA. In particular, in section 7: QUOTE You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.

Screw the EULA...I DONT WANT SP2.. Period

#4.11 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 23 Feb 2005 - 01:18

THIS ONLY INSTALLS ON SETUPS THAT HAVE AUTOMATIC UPDATES TURNED ON.

#4.12 Posted by PCyr on 24 Feb 2005 - 03:51

QUOTE

Screw the EULA...I DONT WANT SP2.. Period

Too bad. No one is forcing you to use XP.

#4.13 Posted by naruchan on 24 Feb 2005 - 05:41

You do realize that paying for a license doesn't equate to owning the software... right? A license simply gives you the right to use it. javascript:addsmilie('')
javascript:addsmilie('')

#4.14 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 24 Feb 2005 - 07:53

naruchan has a good point, other than the poor use of copying a smilie link.
javascript:addsmilie('')

(8 replies) #5 Posted by Samurai-HQ on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:49

Well this has come as a complete shocker.

Let them try and force SP2 onto my PC, and I'll be taking MS to court. Fkers.

#5.1 Posted by clonk on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:53

hahaha... I am certain they have cleared this with their legal department. I'll be interested to see how far you get.

#5.2 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:50

You only get it if you have automatic updates on.

#5.3 Posted by leojei on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:15

SP2 will be installed automatically if you choose "Download and install updates automatically" at a set time. And while your Windows does that without your attention, you have agreed Microsoft to do it, so legal isn't an issue here.

#5.4 Posted by spiritv2 on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:31

Basically open wide and say aahhhh

#5.5 Posted by rafter109 on 22 Feb 2005 - 16:18

You obviously can't read. Microsoft EULA includes a provision that allows Microsoft to update their software on your computer as they see fit. By installing their software on your computer, you have entered a legally binding contract as outlined in the EULA. If you don't like it, don't install it. You have a choice, so dont blame your illiteracy on Microsoft, they're just attempting to do what everyone is bitching at them to do anyway, make computing safer and more secure. Obviously its a loose-loose situation for them anyway because shmucks like you won't give them credit when its due.

#5.6 Posted by frazell on 22 Feb 2005 - 17:30

Agreed....

I never cease to be amazed at people... They scream that MS sucks because Windows isn't secure then a soon as MS makes it more secure they scream that they shouldn't have the right too.

Heres good advice for you (Samurai-HQ and the like)...

Go download Linux and run that or go buy a Mac and STFU...

#5.7 Posted by werejag on 22 Feb 2005 - 19:13

rafter109 please show me one case that was decided on a eula. legally if i do not sign the document it can not be a forced on me.

#5.8 Posted by theh0g on 22 Feb 2005 - 19:36

werejag:
you clicked "I agree" and that's the same, legaly and everything. Don't get me wrong, I'm against these kind of things, I don't want anything being installed "automaticaly" on my machine - especialy in this case since Microsoft is the last company on earth that will ever BS me about any security, since their incompetence is the main reason for most of worms/spam/younameit problems (IMHO).

But I'm not worried, I only use XP at work (since I'm forced to), at home, I switched to another OS two months ago (no flamewars) and no way in hell I'm ever switching back. No worries, only thing I download few times a week are upgrades for applications (when will Microsoft start fixing their applications? There are many bugs all over Windows, yet we only see some "security" patches, most of which are useless to average user).

Just my 5 cents.

#6 Posted by PeterF on 22 Feb 2005 - 09:53

I think what they mean is that Microsoft is going to disable the registry key functionality that let corporate admins decide whether to have SP2 appearing on Windows Update.
So if after this date they didn't solve problems with SP2, they can still ask end users not to install it.

#7 Posted by leebobs on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:06

Hmm... Not too sure that a number of Corporate IT departments will like this. Then again if there not using SUS, well lets just say they probably shouldn't be running an IT department (using Windows) anyway.

#8 Posted by Gary_Player on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:13

Woa there...that's pretty hardcore of them

#9 Posted by Jason on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:30

I completely agree with this, you all bitch about wanting more security well now just put up with it and shut up.

(5 replies) #10 Posted by shichiroji4 on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:37

M$ is getting more more batty these days. First there was compulsory MSN update, now SP2. So if M$'s buggy SP2 happens to crash a user's XP after updating, that's just too bad.

Seriously, how ****ty can M$ get?

#10.1 Posted by Jason on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:40

SP2 isn't buggy and Microsoft are out to protect their users against security issues.

#10.2 Posted by MrCobra on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:26

When I installed SP2 I had bandwidth issues. If I was downloading I couldn't voice chat and vise versa. Did a slipstream and a fresh install of SP2 four times. Problem still persisted. Went back to SP1 and that issue was a thing of the past. Unless someone can tell me the fix for that, SP2 sh!t will not be going in on my side.

#10.3 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:51

Batty because they are allowing automatic update to... automatically update?

#10.4 Posted by rafter109 on 22 Feb 2005 - 16:46

If you are downloading manually, that would be your problem. If you are allowing windows update to download SP2 then there is a pre-SP2 util that works with Auto Updates and rather intelegently downloads when other applications on your computer arent using all the bandwidth you have available. so if ur voice chat is using 80% of your available bandwitdth, this tool would use 20%. Of course I cant remember the name of it.

#10.5 Posted by frazell on 22 Feb 2005 - 17:34

Or you could just order the SP2 CD from MS which is free btw and not have to download it at all...

If it's a bug you think you found why don't you do the smart thing and contact MS... Unless you are using an illegal copy of Windows (which would be the only reason i see not to contact them) then u get what you deserve.

I mean i love people who find a problem in software (though yours is not a confirmed problem in Windows could be your hardware/software etc.), but only sit there on their ass and complain w/o telling the software maker. How in hell do you expect it to be fixed? oh i see god will do it...

#11 Posted by EnIgMa-PenGuIn on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:48

Excellent, maybe some machines that are presently under threat due to user resistance or havent been updated due to lack of use knowledge will fall into line.

(3 replies) #12 Posted by LampkinsMateSteve on 22 Feb 2005 - 10:53

What happens if you don't have enough hard-drive space? Would it screw up your install?


Just hypothetical question.

#12.1 Posted by rIaHc3 on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:11

Hmm nice question...

#12.2 Posted by FuhrerDarqueSyde on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:41

During its preinst phases it prolly checks for disk space....one would hope

#12.3 Posted by IGx89 on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:34

Yes it does. I gave one computer a 5gb OS partition back in 2002, and it filled up incredibly quickly. The last year or so, free space on that partition has been hovering between 50-500mb; took a lot of work to find enough stuff to delete in order to have enough extra free space to install SP2 :/

#13 Posted by Fragaday on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:06

This article skews the truth and is clearly designed to rile up the zealots and get them frothing at the mouth. They're just disabling the "Pretend SP2 doesnt exist" key, which I doubt anyone outside a corporate environment would even think of using anyway. You will still be able to untick it when you go to WU just like you've always been able to.

#14 Posted by nw_raptor on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:27

I don't see why someone would not install SP2. Any applications which had problems with SP2 should be fixed by now, so that means corporations should be ready aswell.

(1 reply) #15 Posted by Skyfrog on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:30

Everybody panic! Microsoft is coming to your house to install SP2 at gunpoint! SP2 is buggy and will cause your computer to melt! Hide your computers! The sky is falling!

I hate sensationalistic FUD. Microsoft is not forcing anyone to install it, even though anyone in their right mind should have installed it long ago. It's not buggy or evil; just because there were some minor issues when it first came out, some people are scared of it, like it's going to hurt them. I think others refuse to install it out of spite, as if they are really sticking it to Microsoft by refusing it.

I've been running it since they day they released it, and I've installed it on half a dozen computers. No problems with it at all, not one. None of the computers crashed or caught on fire, Microsoft didn't reach through the screen and steal my soul, and my computer is now better protected and less buggy. What's so horrible about that?

#15.1 Posted by Ideas Man on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:08

QUOTE

I think others refuse to install it out of spite, as if they are really sticking it to Microsoft by refusing it.

I bet these are the same people that cry when their system is comprimised by an exploit that was patched months ago. Poor Microsoft, has to put up with the stupid as well as the smart, only the stupid always make the most noise when it is basically their fault.

If everyone had Automatic Updates turned on, Blaster and Sasser would've been non-events. If people actually updated their computers like they're supposed to, it would also have been a non-event.

SP2 is just wonderful, if you havn't installed it yet, you are doing yourself a great disservice.

#16 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 22 Feb 2005 - 11:53

To prevent further posts from people who refuse to look into the issue...
Microsoft released a patch a long time ago for people who would like to keep automatic update on, but not download SP2. Those who are using the patch will now get SP2, those who are not running auto-update will amazingly... not auto-update.

#17 Posted by shao on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:02

GOOD!

#18 Posted by Sleeper on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:05

reading this may help people understand

http://news.com.com/Microsoft+extends+bloc...ml?tag=nefd.top

Last edited by 652 on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:10

#19 Posted by forster on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:07

I dont see why people wont update to SP2 - surely they can only benefit from it?

#20 Posted by JustinTime on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:10

I agree, just install SP2 and stop being a BABY!

#21 Posted by Arkle on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:14

I'd have to disagree with all these people complaining about SP2.
I've had it installed since the day it came out, and I've got the exe for IT Professionals so I can install it again when I reformat. I've never noticed anything bad with SP2. Alls I know is I've not been hacked or virus infected since I installed it. Whereas I had been prior to it.

The only thing that gets me about it is those flash animations that it pops up to tell you about ActiveX downloads. Now that I use Firefox I don't even have to put up with them anymore.

Every piece of my software works fine with SP2, as does all my games. People should just realise that it's common sense to update to a clearly superior build, then a lot more programs will become SP2 compatible, since nobody will be using SP1.

(1 reply) #22 Posted by scoobydoobie on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:28

QUOTE

I hate sensationalistic FUD

perhaps you should complain about the news poster for posting such FUD then....

#22.1 Posted by Skyfrog on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:31

Funny, I thought I was.

#23 Posted by nookadum on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:35

Well, as long as they keep the option of having the DEP option circumvented, it should be okay for most people who still use legacy programs.

(3 replies) #24 Posted by RedCoat999 on 22 Feb 2005 - 12:51

My company doesn't update windows at all, and we have auto updates set to off. So there!!!

#24.1 Posted by kronik on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:01

and I am the person who hacked your company computers and is currently browsing through your wonderfull collection of porn

#24.2 Posted by frazell on 22 Feb 2005 - 17:44

lol the only one ur sticking it too is yourself (and your company) not MS as it's your company that has to deal with the damages that will result from running those widely open OS versions... Don't think MS is going to help you recover lost data, uninstall spyware, or anyother thing that can happen easily pre-sp2...

#24.3 Posted by RedCoat999 on 22 Feb 2005 - 20:46

I have updated at home and would here at work too. I changed my setting to get updates in the past, but was told to turn it off by our IS dept!!!!!

#25 Posted by Porp on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:10

I don't see what's so bad about this? SP2 is fine.. And if you don't want it, dont Windows Update! Simple.

#26 Posted by ViperSnake on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:26

Good thing I installed it after the launch, now MS won't have to stuff it into my face.

#27 Posted by Burly on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:29

Why the hell is everyone in shock? This is hilarious. They are not forcing anyone to do anything. They are just supporting the latest software version (SP2) on Windows Update.

(3 replies) #28 Posted by gimbo2003 on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:35

Last time I used SP2 I had to reinstall windows as it totally messed up my system. It is in fact illegal for them to force the update on you, as you as a consumer of thier product have the choice to upgrade or decline any upgrades (true in the uk)

#28.1 Posted by ichi on 22 Feb 2005 - 13:51

I suppose that's why they aren't actually forcing the update.

#28.2 Posted by threedaysdwn on 22 Feb 2005 - 19:41

SP2 didn't mess up your system. If you did have problems, most likely they were due to a large collection of malware you'd installed on your system.

#28.3 Posted by PCyr on 24 Feb 2005 - 03:57

1) They aren't forcing you. The article title is WRONG. A better title will be "Microsoft To Require Windows and Automatic Update Users To Install SP2"
2) Even if they were "forcing" you, maybe you should read licence agreements before clicking "I accept"

QUOTE

You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.

#29 Posted by eilegz on 22 Feb 2005 - 14:03

well this article should be renamed to "Microsoft would force to install SP2 on automatic updates machines"

Anyways its good the idea and for common user but somehow if microsoft dont want to support older sp1 machines with new updates or fixes then its goona be a problem

Migration from sp1 to sp2 its hard and some it enviroment dont want to take a risk personnally i recommend everyone to upgrade to sp2

(2 replies) #30 Posted by EduardValencia on 22 Feb 2005 - 14:17

i agree with Microsoft®,everyone with sp2 installed will create a safer enviroment

#30.1 Posted by devinlamothe on 22 Feb 2005 - 14:54

I agree. Without them doing this, potential DDoS nodes or other malicious nodes would be out there just waiting to be infected with some MyDoom varient or something. Hopefully this will make the internet safer. (And for people using IE, they will now be rid of those annoying pop-ups. )

#30.2 Posted by EduardValencia on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:00

QUOTE

(And for people using IE, they will now be rid of those annoying pop-ups. )

and better security

#31 Posted by Nelsinho on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:00

Microsoft is correct, I agree of course

(3 replies) #32 Posted by proactivity on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:04

if this is true, then april 12th is the last day I'll be able to do my job. sp2 causes a problem in seebeyond egate 4.5.3 where you can no longer compile code within the egate interface, and so far no workaround has been found. this has triggered a dept-wide rollback to sp1 from the company standard sp2 machine builds. oh well!

#32.1 Posted by diamonds on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:15

or it looks like you will be forced to use somehting else that works.

#32.2 Posted by Ryster092 on 22 Feb 2005 - 22:26

Any software company that has not released patches and updates to make their software SP2 compatible by now is grossly incompetent and totally irresponsible.

#32.3 Posted by PCyr on 24 Feb 2005 - 03:58

Solution: Turn off Automatic Updates, don't use Windows Update, and get better software before you're infected with worms.

(2 replies) #33 Posted by Mongrel on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:18

I've got a non-survivable SP2 issue also - on my Dell 8200 at home, I tried installing both from the download and from the CD, and after restarting the entire system slowed to a near standstill! It literally took 4 minutes just to SEE the desktop, another 3 before icons started appearing. 13 minutes later both times I was able to make it to the add/remove programs panel and uninstall the update...

From what I've been able to determine, there's a problem with the P4 processor BIOS on this particular machine, but Dell has done SQUAT to fix it

#33.1 Posted by frazell on 22 Feb 2005 - 17:46

Then complain to dell... wouldn't that make sense as you don't have a SP2 problem you have a hardware problem...

#33.2 Posted by bartech455 on 22 Feb 2005 - 23:21

I service computers in Corp offices and most of there software like it or not just will not work on SP2.. also i have seen the Dells not work on SP2, Dont mind updates but do mind being forced to update. Thats why i turn off the Automatic update service in windows as soon as its intalled. Dot believe in the MS updates ether... have had to many times where after they are install the system runs bad. I just keep a good AV and updated, and keep my system behind a firewall....

(1 reply) #34 Posted by Shibby on 22 Feb 2005 - 15:35

i will not upgrade to SP2 untill i do a big upgrade to my computer.
i'm not taking the risk of alot of my programs not working afterwards.
it will only be a month or two till i upgrade my computer, during the meantime SP2 has been out for months and so far i've been fine.
my brother has a copy of xp with sp2 slip streamed, it runs ok but found some features are anoying but i hear you can turn them off.