Merged: Windows XP SP2 - discuss it here!

[MadGamer]

Originally Posted by Pea-Pod

Yes I was going to say I got my full version of XP Pro from Ebay for only £95. Very Happy with it. Needless to say is this SP2 actually worth it, if your system is running happily and merrily along. You know what they say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

You get a lot of extras, believe me.

[MikeyB]

Originally Posted by Richard M

(From original MS Quote) Whereas SP1 had features built in to prevent pirates from downloading it

Hmmmm, now my mate has, shall we say, a "shady" copy of XP Pro, and has had SP1 installed since it was available, so I don't think their plan to stop the pirates worked that well!!


And just my 2p on the 98/ME debate.
From personal experience, all the PC's I installed ME on, it was more stable and faster than 98, particularly on mine, but then I do mess with them a lot (and I work in IT)

But XP wins hands down over any previous version of Windows, better than 2000 from a home users point of view, in my opinion.

[ZrByte]

Just to clarify slightly. With Win ME if you are lucky enough to get a stable install it will be solid as a rock. The problem lies there, if you are unlucky installing the OS (About 80% of the time in my experience) the thing will be about as stable as a drunk in an earthquake.
Since I had to keep my copy of WinME I did try it again later down the line, I ran it stable for 7 months (a personal record for me, even with WinXP I normally have to reformat every 3-5 months), then I needed to reformat through no fault of the OS and I never managed to get it to run stable again.

I never got what people meant about Win98 being unstable though? Sure it could be if it was left running for long periods without rebooting but that was a common problem with OS's at the time. Or are these people reffering to Win98 standard, and not Win98SE?? I only briefly used standard 98 before moving onto SE and I rareley ran into a crash wich wasnt down to shoddy game coding or cheap hardware.

EDIT: I only even upgraded to XP eventually because I cant use 2k on my laptop and for some reason I couldnt get XP to play nice with 2k on my main machine(e.g. first time accessing my network in a new browser could take upto 2mins)

[trentsteel]

More news, back on topic...
Microsoft group product manager Barry Goffe told ComputerTimes that Windows XP Service Pack 2 would not exclude pirated copies from upgrading, and that it was more important to keep user safe than to be "concerned about the revenue issue."

To clarify its position, a Microsoft spokesperson told BetaNews, "Press reports indicating Windows XP Service Pack 2 will install on pirated or illegal copies of Windows XP are not entirely true. Prior to installing, SP2 will check the OS' product ID (PID) against a list of known pirated PIDs. If a PID is found to be invalid, SP2 will not install."

BetaNews confirmed the accuracy of the spokesperson's statement with a source within the company.

Source: http://www.neowin.net

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by andygrif

Ah OK....well ME was a whole different story....personally I think that OS should ONLY have been available for free

I can see the point, and you sound like one of the good guys who will buy the product if it works for you - which is fine.

It's everyone to their own....I'm a bit of a coward really!!

Off topic ish, but I was most frustrated, buying Office SBE with my laptop and finding that SBE can only be installed on one machine, wheras all other Office installations can be installed legitimatly on your own Laptop and Desktop. So I need to buy another copy, overall my outlay will have been higher than if I had bought Office Developer edition / Professional and installed it on both machines.

Originally Posted by Stuartbe

Bear in mind m8 that having 2 firewalls running can create problems and even weaken system security. Its better to just run ZAPRO IMHO....

Going to install SP2 tonight on the inlaws machine !!

Anything to watch out for peeps ?

Or a Router - that does the trick and does not impact on performance and can cost as little as ZA Pro.

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by trentsteel

BetaNews confirmed the accuracy of the spokesperson's statement with a source within the company.

Source: http://www.neowin.net

Is there a backpedalling smiley available anywhere?

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by trentsteel

To clarify its position, a Microsoft spokesperson told BetaNews, "Press reports indicating Windows XP Service Pack 2 will install on pirated or illegal copies of Windows XP are not entirely true. Prior to installing, SP2 will check the OS' product ID (PID) against a list of known pirated PIDs. If a PID is found to be invalid, SP2 will not install."

I think SP1 worked the same way re: known pirated codes.

[dragon]

the latest rc1 of sp2 will lockout your pc and ask you activate if you have an invalid product id

it then stupidly gives u an option to change your product id by changing your cd key under the activate by phone options and then cancelling the activation


there are various utilties around that will allow u to run sp2 on a pirated windows and im sure if anyone needs them they know the best place to look.



personally i think the way to beat piracy is to charge a more reasonable price. IMO most ppl can't afford to pay £100 for the OS + £300 or more for office.etc etc

if a mod feels this post shall be deleted then fair enough, ive tryed not to break any rules im just saying it CAN be done but obv im not going to go into details how if somebody wants to know that they will have to find out for themselves i WILL NOT tell anyone how its done so dont bother PMing me for links cus i WON'T give any even if i did know them.

[mart44]

Regarding the new SP2 firewall, I have read articles saying that it blocks outgoing information, yet Microsoft's own description of it doesn't say it does. Microsoft page. The relevant part being: 'Windows Firewall is a stateful host-based firewall that discards unsolicited incoming traffic'. It doesn't mention anything about blocking outgoing information.

True that permissions can be configured in the new firewall to allow or disallow some services access to the Net, but what if something nasty did get onto the computer (perhaps via script on a web page)? Would the new firewall block any information it might send out to goodness knows where? It seems to me that it wouldn't.

I notice that one of the changes made by SP2 is to prevent script from being run on IE unless you specifically give it permission to do so. Perhaps this is to do with stopping the possibility of attack occurring from that direction and because the firewall won't block anything from getting out if something nasty does get in.

It seems to me that people relying on the new firewall for protection, while using a browser that allows scripts, could perhaps be vulnerable to things getting onto the computer, which might then result in information being sent out through the firewall.

For instance: The first thing I noticed after installing SP2 was that my own homepage bought up a notice at the top of the page saying: 'This page has been restricted from running active content that might be able to access your computer. If you trust this page, click here to allow it access on your computer'. The reason for this message was because the page contained a mouseover script. On the grounds that any page triggering this warning would scare visitors away, the script has now been taken out.

Firefox produces no such warning and just runs the mouseover script. Presumably this could mean that if anything did get in via script, I'd be left somewhat vulnerable by the new firewall. Even though Firefox is reputed to be a browser not so prone to security breaches, I don't feel inclined to rely on the new firewall if info can pass out through it.

I ran the SP2 firewall for a while and the only time I was asked if a program could access the Net was when I opened my web editor. This has a file uploader included so it needs access. Other than that nothing has asked. When running ZoneAlarm, a whole lot of programs on my computer ask for access. So, I can only assume that the new Windows firewall not asking permissions for the same programs means that it is allowing two-way communications without any input from me...and would do so for anything. If everyone else is getting asked permissions for everything (as per ZoneAlarm), then maybe there's something wrong with my installation of the firewall.

If this is the norm though, then I don't see the new firewall is any better than the original version other than it having the feature of being switched on by default.

Thoughts?

[Neil]

Not sure if this is history or news TBH.....

Contrary to the remarks it made to the ComputerTimes, Microsoft now claims that it will not permit users who have obtained Windows XP illegally to upgrade to its latest service release. Instead, the software giant will continue to enforce compliance with its licensing.

In a nutshell, Microsoft group product manager Barry Goffe told ComputerTimes that Windows XP Service Pack 2 would not exclude pirated copies from upgrading, and that it was more important to keep user safe than to be "concerned about the revenue issue."

There you have it-no XPSP2 for those who have illegal copies.

[Defiant]

So its basically has the same anti piracy features as SP1. Well as I've mentioned before on here there are ways around that but it will keep allot away from it.

[dragon]

person who said it has the same antipircy features as xp1 is wrong it has more sp1 dont install on a blacklisted key sp2 does then locks you out with activation!

[Defiant]

Originally Posted by dragon

person who said it has the same antipircy features as xp1 is wrong it has more sp1 dont install on a blacklisted key sp2 does then locks you out with activation!

There's also ways back in as stated and you can get the full install of sp2 with a pirated copy like I said. It just depend's what they did to get around it

Originally Posted by Neil

Not sure if this is history or news TBH.....



There you have it-no XPSP2 for those who have illegal copies.

why do they bother, they tried with SP1 didnt work, they tried with windwos update, it didnt work. When ate they going to learn that its NOT POSSIBLE to stop people. Why waste money, the people who want to crack it will crack it, the people who want to use it will use it, the people who make money out of piracy should be tracked and prosicuted.

[Defiant]

Originally Posted by gary_580

why do they bother, they tried with SP1 didnt work, they tried with windwos update, it didnt work. When ate they going to learn that its NOT POSSIBLE to stop people. Why waste money, the people who want to crack it will crack it, the people who want to use it will use it, the people who make money out of piracy should be tracked and prosicuted.

The people who crack it dont do it for money though. They do it for the challenge of getting one over Microsoft. But Like I've said before I think the activation is working partly. You have to know what your doing in order to get past this activation thing. Even the newbie approach of using that crack in safe mode. So in that way it is