WInXP SP3

Why not release a SP3 for WinXP that incluldes all the latest updates?

Jupiter
Wed Jun 15 02:09:19 CDT 2005

Perhaps it will happen.
But for now it seems like about 2 years between Service Packs leaving over a
year to go.
If and when will be posted on this link:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"D@annyBoy" <origin@ld@nnyboy @ gm@il.com> wrote in message
news:%23ov1zaXcFHA.1448@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Why not release a SP3 for WinXP that incluldes all the latest updates?

Simon
Wed Jun 15 09:50:30 CDT 2005

Hi,

There are a number of third-party solutions for multiple installations of XP
Hotfixes. One which I use is called AutoPatcher and the latest 5.1 version
was released in May.

I am sure that a June update will be released now that "Microsoft Patch
Tuesday" has come and gone :-)

For further information check out their forum on Neowin.net:

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?s=14aa5f5379964553be34935ca940b692&showforum=89

(watch wrapping) or via:

http://www.autopatcher.com/

While the download is large if you need to install or update many XP SP2
based PC's then this is worth the download.

Kind Regards

Simon

PA
Wed Jun 15 11:38:54 CDT 2005

Why not just enable Automatic Updates?
--
~PA Bear

D@annyBoy wrote:
> Why not release a SP3 for WinXP that incluldes all the latest updates?

Imhotep
Wed Jun 15 12:10:32 CDT 2005

PA Bear wrote:

> Why not just enable Automatic Updates?

Because on "fresh" install you can just install the SP. Remember that
Windows users do a lot of system rebuilds....

-Im

PA
Wed Jun 15 15:21:54 CDT 2005

And a lot of 'em use their systems properly and securely and don't.
--
~PA Bear

Imhotep wrote:
> PA Bear wrote:
>
>> Why not just enable Automatic Updates?
>
> Because on "fresh" install you can just install the SP. Remember that
> Windows users do a lot of system rebuilds....
>
> -Im

Karl
Fri Jun 17 06:22:12 CDT 2005

It takes a fair amount of effort for MS to create service packs, and it
causes a fair amount of effort for many enterprises [testing, rollout, etc.]
when one is released, because although service packs can be rolled out
automatically to hundreds or thousands of systems overnight like a patch,
many people feel that isn't a great idea, to avoid causing a service
pack-related problem with hundreds of your computers simultaneously.

So, it takes time between service pack releases.

MS has been known to create post-service pack rollups from time to time that
bundle all of the patches since that service pack into one, but only when a
significant number of patches have been released since.


"D@annyBoy" <origin@ld@nnyboy @ gm@il.com> wrote in message
news:%23ov1zaXcFHA.1448@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Why not release a SP3 for WinXP that incluldes all the latest updates?
>
>

Imhotep
Fri Jun 17 10:48:35 CDT 2005

PA Bear wrote:

> And a lot of 'em use their systems properly and securely and don't.

With spyware as it is, most to a lot of rebuilds quite often...

Imhotep
Fri Jun 17 12:24:40 CDT 2005

Karl Levinson, mvp wrote:

> It takes a fair amount of effort for MS to create service packs, and it
> causes a fair amount of effort for many enterprises [testing, rollout,
> etc.] when one is released, because although service packs can be rolled
> out automatically to hundreds or thousands of systems overnight like a
> patch, many people feel that isn't a great idea, to avoid causing a
> service pack-related problem with hundreds of your computers
> simultaneously.
>
> So, it takes time between service pack releases.
>
> MS has been known to create post-service pack rollups from time to time
> that bundle all of the patches since that service pack into one, but only
> when a significant number of patches have been released since.
>
>
> "D@annyBoy" <origin@ld@nnyboy @ gm@il.com> wrote in message
> news:%23ov1zaXcFHA.1448@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> Why not release a SP3 for WinXP that incluldes all the latest updates?
>>
>>

If Microsoft tested there software better more people would "trust" a fresh
new patch and there would not be as many issues with an enterprise
rollout...

PA
Fri Jun 17 13:17:34 CDT 2005

Imhotep wrote:
> PA Bear wrote:
> > And a lot of 'em use their systems properly and securely and don't.
>
> With spyware as it is, most to a lot of rebuilds quite often...

See my post which you quoted. Millions of users do /not/ get hijacked and
most who do are able to get rid of hijackware w/out flattening the box.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE) & Security

Imhotep
Fri Jun 17 17:23:35 CDT 2005

PA Bear wrote:

> Imhotep wrote:
>> PA Bear wrote:
>> > And a lot of 'em use their systems properly and securely and don't.
>>
>> With spyware as it is, most to a lot of rebuilds quite often...
>
> See my post which you quoted. Millions of users do /not/ get hijacked and
> most who do are able to get rid of hijackware w/out flattening the box.

Sorry but the vast majority, not just the people here, do in fact have to
deal with spyware hell and do in fact resort to reinstalling windows. Are
you really saying that, percentage-wise, this is not true?????????

-Imhotep

PA
Fri Jun 17 17:52:41 CDT 2005

Imhotep wrote:
> > > > And a lot of 'em use their systems properly and securely and don't.
> > >
> > > With spyware as it is, most to a lot of rebuilds quite often...
> >
> > See my post which you quoted. Millions of users do /not/ get hijacked
> > and most who do are able to get rid of hijackware w/out flattening the
> > box.
>
> Sorry but the vast majority, not just the people here, do in fact have to
> deal with spyware hell and do in fact resort to reinstalling windows. Are
> you really saying that, percentage-wise, this is not true?????????

Yes, and I'd put money on it.

Jupiter
Fri Jun 17 21:41:19 CDT 2005

Your statement is a little incorrect.
change it to this and it has more truth:
"With spyware as it is, those who do not take care of their computers do a
lot of rebuilds quite often..."
Spyware has been an almost insignificant problem for me and my computers.
However I do see what you describe on computers poorly maintained.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Imhotep" <NoSpam@NoThanks.com> wrote in message
news:nhCse.209$Lr4.54@fed1read03...
> With spyware as it is, most to a lot of rebuilds quite often...

Imhotep
Sat Jun 18 14:33:11 CDT 2005

PA Bear wrote:

> Imhotep wrote:
>> > > > And a lot of 'em use their systems properly and securely and don't.
>> > >
>> > > With spyware as it is, most to a lot of rebuilds quite often...
>> >
>> > See my post which you quoted. Millions of users do /not/ get hijacked
>> > and most who do are able to get rid of hijackware w/out flattening the
>> > box.
>>
>> Sorry but the vast majority, not just the people here, do in fact have to
>> deal with spyware hell and do in fact resort to reinstalling windows. Are
>> you really saying that, percentage-wise, this is not true?????????
>
> Yes, and I'd put money on it.

Then you wold lose..

George
Fri Jun 24 17:28:57 CDT 2005

"Karl Levinson, mvp" <levinson_k@despammed.com> wrote:

>MS has been known to create post-service pack rollups from time to time that
>bundle all of the patches since that service pack into one, but only when a
>significant number of patches have been released since.

Going from past experience, it should be getting close to time
for MS to do so. I applied SP2 early on, and a quick look via
Belarc Advisor shows 29 SP3 updates to date. This doesn't
include fixes for Media Player, .NET framework, or MDAC.

| George Ruch

may
Thu Sep 01 10:55:17 CDT 2005

Try this http://files.9down.com:8080/WXPENUX_SP3.exe

"D@annyBoy" wrote:

> Why not release a SP3 for WinXP that incluldes all the latest updates?
>
>
>

Shenan
Sun Sep 04 12:14:30 CDT 2005

D@annyBoy wrote:
> Why not release a SP3 for WinXP that incluldes all the latest updates?

Testing, complaints from everyone when a new SP does release - people who
still have not released SP2 to their customers for various reasons, etc.

It's not like it is difficult to keep a system patched now. AutoUpdate,
Autopatcher products, scripting, etc.

For those who install new systems - why not integrate all those patches into
your install - whether it be a network or CD installation?
For those who are managing multiple systems - WSUS works great! Can't do
that? A little scripting for logon scripts or pushing the updates to
machines are all easily automated by a system admin.
For those who just manage their own little set of machines - autopatcher
(autopatcher.com) or just using the built in AutoUpdates feature works fine.

As a person who does lots of new installs - yeah - I can see where it would
be nice to have only one patch to integrate into my install.. when SP2 came
out - everything did get neater for the moment.. But with the ability to
"slipstream" almost every patch into the install now - I could care less if
another "roll-up" comes out - makes little difference in my effort to keep
things up to date.

Autoupdate works for my personal machines just fine.

For my customers with smaller networks - a simple scripted push once a month
keeps them up to date.

For my customers with larger networks - WSUS and a few simple approvals on a
web page keeps them up to date each month.

My question is similar to yours, but with a twist and intended for you (the
OP) :

Why do you need a Service Pack release? Is there something we can help you
with in order to simplify what you see as a complication right now?

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html