Shoutbox

quote:

---

From:Aunty Spam's Net Patrol :: http://www.aunty-spam.com/resistance-is-futile-mi...d-xp-sp1-machines/

Resistance is Futile - Microsoft Forces SP2 Update on All XP and XP SP1 Machines
10:13 pm, 2/21/2005   You are here: Top > Product Reviews > This Article
Note to self: Listen to Aunty live every Thursday night at 8pm on The David Lawrence Show! ( Streamed by KBNP!)



April 12th is the very last day. That’s when the clock runs, and the deadline looms.

And here you thought it was April 15th. Nope, it’s the twelfth. Because we’re not talking about the day your taxes are due. On no. We’re talking about the day that your Windows XP or Windows XP SP1 computer will be automatically updated to XP SP2 (Service Pack 2) whether you want it to or not. Period.

And here you thought that you owned your computer and the contents thereon, and could do whatever you wanted with it, and could choose what would, and what wouldn’t, be installed on it.

Wrong.

Up until now users who did not want to accept the SP2 update had the option of temporarily blocking the update from being downloaded to their machines through the Automatic or Windows Update mechanisms, however that option expires on April 12th.

According to Microsoft’s latest alert on the issue, “The intent of this alert is to provide you with a reminder about the upcoming deadline around the date on which Automatic Update (AU) and Windows Update (WU) will deliver Windows XP SP2 regardless of the presence of the blocking mechanism.”

Now, Aunty isn’t saying that you shouldn’t update to SP2 - indeed, you should, as it fixes many serious security holes. But there is something about removing the element of choice in how a consumer uses a personal product for which they paid which just doesn’t sit well.

---

Wow Microsoft is being pretty gay. I'm going to try and block this as well as I can, since I will never use SP2. I think it's an invasion of privacy and lack of respect for there customers. Those bastards!


UPDATE

I checked the web site again and supposedly they got there facts wrong Check it out

quote:

---

From:Aunty Spam's Net Patrol :: http://www.aunty-spam.com/resistance-is-futile-mi...d-xp-sp1-machines/

An Update to this Article:

At least one person has commented here, and a few others personally to Aunty or in other fora, that Aunty has her facts wrong, that Microsoft is not requiring you to update to SP2, and citing as support for that the fact that Microsoft has stated that they will support SP1 through 2006.

To that Aunty says:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winx...tain/sp2aumng.mspx

..which says, in relevant part:

“UPDATE: Time is running out! Please note that the mechanism to temporarily disable delivery of Windows XP SP2 is only available for a period of 240 days (8 months) from August 16, 2004. At the end of this period (after April 12, 2005), Windows XP SP2 will be delivered to all Windows XP and Windows XP Service Pack 1 systems.”

Now, granted English is Aunty’s first language, but still, to Aunty “will be delivered� means, well, will be delivered.

To those who took Aunty to task saying that this applies only to the Professional edition of XP, Aunty quotes from the same Microsoft document, wherein it offers the following timeline:

“Summary of Relevant Windows XP SP2 Dates

8/06/2004 - Release to manufacturing

8/09/2004 - Release to Microsoft Download Center (full network install package)

8/10/2004 - Release to Automatic Updates (for machines running pre-release versions of Windows XP SP2 only)

8/16/2004 - Release (English) via Software Update Services (SUS)

8/18/2004 - Release (English) via AU to customers running Windows XP Home Edition and not already running a pre-release version of Windows XP SP2

Later in August/2004 - Delivery of Windows XP SP2 (English) via Windows Update and delivery via AU to customers running Windows XP Professional Edition and not already running a pre-release version of Windows XP SP2

4/12/2005 - Windows XP SP2 will be delivered to all Windows XP and Windows XP Service Pack 1 systems.”

Please note the last three dates…it doesn’t say “Professional Edition only"..it says “first systems running Home Edition, then systems running Professional Edition….then all systems.”

It is, however, true that the update cannot be forced on you if you are not running Automatic Update or Windows Update.

Kissy kissy,

Aunty

---

Oh well....

I use SP2 and there's nothing wrong with it. It's a worthwhile upgrade. I'm actually glad that they're doing this. Lately they've really been 'concerned' about security, and I'm glad that they're finally trying to do something about it... well, aside from actually taking the time to fix their software instead of making products like Microsoft AntiSpyware to cover it up...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Caboose
I use SP2 and there's nothing wrong with it. It's a worthwhile upgrade. I'm actually glad that they're doing this. Lately they've really been 'concerned' about security, and I'm glad that they're finally trying to do something about it... well, aside from actually taking the time to fix their software instead of making products like Microsoft AntiSpyware to cover it up...

---

That's no excuse for making us download a 70 mb update in order to fix it. (Note: The download makes sure that you have a power adapter plugged in for all you laptop users.) My school says that I shouldn't download SP2, and I say that I won't because I don't want to waste my time downloading something that is going to get bypasses in about 6 weeks anyways.

quote:

---

Originaly posted by:Caboose
I use SP2 and there's nothing wrong with it. It's a worthwhile upgrade. I'm actually glad that they're doing this. Lately they've really been 'concerned' about security, and I'm glad that they're finally trying to do something about it... well, aside from actually taking the time to fix their software instead of making products like Microsoft AntiSpyware to cover it up...

---

Ahh yea right.... Ermm can someone find my post awhile back, remember that one where I explained why it sucked so much. I'm not good at finding stuff on this forum can anyone help me out here....... 

Not trying to be rude Caboose, but I just think SP2 is riddled with problems. But I do agree with you that It's good for Microsoft to start fixing there problems instead of covering them up but what makes me mad is now there is no choice in whether you want this or not.

yip, when i read the subject, i was like "Who cares, that's good for the users" .

BUT:

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJeX

Now, Aunty isn’t saying that you shouldn’t update to SP2 - indeed, you should, as it fixes many serious security holes. But there is something about removing the element of choice in how a consumer uses a personal product for which they paid which just doesn’t sit well.

---

So true

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJeX
Ahh yea right.... Ermm can someone find my post awhile back, remember that one where I explained why it sucked so much. I'm not good at finding stuff on this forum can anyone help me out here....... 

Not trying to be rude Caboose, but I just think SP2 is riddled with problems. But I do agree with you that It's good for Microsoft to start fixing there problems instead of covering them up but what makes me mad is now there is no choice in whether you want this or not.

---

They should fix IE first, that's the start of their problems TBH.

Yes IE would benifit from a major fix... it would make more sense than useing SP2. Like a firewall, who needs one? If you go to good sites (not warez, porn or other illegal sites) you will be fine. Same goes for most of the security holes. If you browse crap your will get crap.

A firewall is used to keep out hackers, not stop adware.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJeX
Not trying to be rude Caboose, but I just think SP2 is riddled with problems. But I do agree with you that It's good for Microsoft to start fixing there problems instead of covering them up but what makes me mad is now there is no choice in whether you want this or not.

---

After more thought, I kind of agree with you on that bolded part (Chaotic_Shield as well). Users should have the choice to install something. But, then again, SP2 fixes many security problems that need to be addressed.

As for IE, I also agree that it should be one of the first things updated. Around 90% of users still use that pretty blue icon to surf the net, and it definately needs to be rebuilt from the ground up again like back in the old browser wars. Microsoft has said that they're not afraid of Firefox, but I think that they're at least a bit worried. I guess we'll see when the IE 7 beta is released

Hah... when I saw this headline on Neowin earlier, I figured there would be people bitching about it, and I was right.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJeX
Wow Microsoft is being pretty gay.

---

You should use an insult that actually makes sense so you don't look like an idiot.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJeX
I think it's an invasion of privacy

---

WTF? They're giving you an update for a product that they developed, not taking anything away from you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJeX
lack of respect for there customers

---

Possibly, but what they're doing makes sense. They shouldn't have to keep supporting users who are too stubborn to use the latest & greatest version of Windows XP.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chaotic_Shield
waste my time downloading something that is going to get bypasses in about 6 weeks anyways

---

"get bypasses"? What are you talking about? And SP2 has been out for like 6 months, not 6 weeks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJeX
Yes IE would benifit from a major fix... it would make more sense than useing SP2.

---

Err... many of the SP2 improvements are for IE.