 wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | Should have done it from the start... They should have locked it down sufficiently from the start. But they got hit anyway. And instead of being proactive, they have been reactive for years. I don't think they will recover from the bad PR.
puritan | |
|
 | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| Re: Should have done it from the start... said by wentlanc  :
They should have locked it down sufficiently from the start.
Microsoft did just that with Windows Server 2003. You have to explicitly enable each Internet-related service. The only thing I don't like is that you still need to reboot the OS after doing certain patches. That kind of downtime is unacceptable in a production environment. Oh well, serves you right for going with such an OS.
--
9/11 was the best thing to happen to Michael Moore
Win another one for the Gipper! Bush/Cheney 2004 | |
|
| | 
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith
| Re: Should have done it from the start... I've checked out a lot of the things available for 2003 Server and for a lot of things you don't need a reboot, just the major changes.
I remember with 9.x & NT if you even looked at the stupid thing the wrong way, it would ask for a reboot.
Never tried WinME
W2K was much better
And if you do something in XP that requires a reboot, chances 2003 server will require it also. In every one of the MS classes I've taken I've been told that XP-Pro is the workstation version of 2003 server | |
|
| | | 
Pz_
join:2001-03-31
Brownsburg, IN
clubs: | Re: Should have done it from the start... You aren't even kidding. I remember with 9x that if you even opened the network folder...and then left (without doing anything) it asked you to reboot.
lol | |
|
| | wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | What about Win2k, which will be supported until 2005??
puritan | |
|
| JimF
join:2003-06-15
Allentown, PA
| I just found out that Firefox 0.9 doesn't allow some sites through the pop-up blocker, even though they are on the allowed list. This is not exactly a fatal flaw, but when you add in the web sites (relatively few) that don't display properly, most people will stick with IE. Why trade a headache for an upset stomach? I don't think Bill needs to worry about his stock price too much. | |
|
| | 
CO_Chris
Premium
join:2001-08-28
Broomfield, CO
 ·Comcast
 ·Comcast Digital Vo..
edit:
July 4th, @08:14PM
| Re: Should have done it from the start... I just found out that Firefox 0.9 doesn't allow some sites through the pop-up blocker, even though they are on the allowed list. This is not exactly a fatal flaw, but when you add in the web sites (relatively few) that don't display properly, most people will stick with IE. Why trade a headache for an upset stomach? I don't think Bill needs to worry about his stock price too much.
you got to be kidding right? I will never go back to IE for the S%$%^T that MS makes . Firefox0.9.1 has been the best yet and all we have to look forward to is it getting better. I tell people every day do dump IE and for the most part 75% do and by far the Norm Best Buy shopper dont have a clue about how the internet works or what they need. I see it every day
I see people ask what's a firewall?
Do i really need Antivirus whats that do for me??
what is spam is that why i get all the pop ups? and if so how can i stop that? will spam blocker work?
just the Norm ??? i get every day | |
|
| | | stridr69
join:2003-05-19
San Luis Obispo, CA
| Re: Should have done it from the start... i just downloaded Firefox 0.9.1 yesterday(7/3/04), and have yet to see it hiccup at all. Great beta release, can't wait for 1.0 to come out. Too bad the masses out there don't know what a sweet browser Firefox is-much better then Netscape7 by far. Currently I use Netscape6 to avoid the nefarious problems that IE6 offers. And, no, I don't want to lock down my browser to the point where text is the only option.
Just my 10 cents worth...
 | |
|
elitedreamr
Premium
join:2003-06-24
Acworth, GA | I won't be the first to get it!! I have to say, I won't be one of the first to download SP2 when it's released...There is no telling how many NEW problems it will cause. I think I'll wait a month or so after it's released and see. | |
|
| 
not quite right
I'D Tell You,But Your Head Would Explode
join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA
| Re: I won't be the first to get it!! said by elitedreamr :
I have to say, I won't be one of the first to download SP2 when it's released...There is no telling how many NEW problems it will cause. I think I'll wait a month or so after it's released and see.
In contrast I've using SP2 RC2 for weeks now with no problems what so ever, it's been very stable! YMMV
-T | |
|
| | 
storm64007
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Freeport, NY
edit:
July 4th, @12:26PM
| Re: I won't be the first to get it!! said by not quite right :
said by elitedreamr :
I have to say, I won't be one of the first to download SP2 when it's released...There is no telling how many NEW problems it will cause. I think I'll wait a month or so after it's released and see.
In contrast I've using SP2 RC2 for weeks now with no problems what so ever, it's been very stable! YMMV
-T
Same here.No problems at all.Very smooth and like all the new security features. | |
|
| | | hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| Re: I won't be the first to get it!! Same here with XP SP2 RC2. No problems at all. Actually its a little faster at doing things from what I've seen so far.
IE does a great job with the Pop-Up Blocker as well. And ActiveX isnt enabled by auto. You have to set each site you wish to run ActiveX to cut down on the viruses and shit from websites. Great job MS! | |
|
| | | | 
72276539
Premium
join:2001-01-19
Atlanta, GA | Re: I won't be the first to get it!! Come on guys.... quit with saying the good things about a Microsoft product. You know that is not allowed on DSLR. | |
|
| | | | | hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH | Re: I won't be the first to get it!! So what. I like MS products. Just because other people don't thats their problem. MS will always be around. | |
|
| | 
IGGY
No Guru Just Here To Help
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-30
Chatham, IL
| Well I've been using it since release candidate 1. The funny thing is. No one seems to point out 1 SP2 hasn't been effected by any of the recent "exploits". 2 a simple pop up blocker negated the 2nd flaw. 3 the 1st flaw was similar to what occurred with Nimda. But you didn't see near the uproar you saw this time around.
As has been stated in several other post and threads. Security by obscurity will only work for so long. SP2 is definitely a step in the right direction. But as I stated awhile back. Either way Microsoft is screwed PR wise. They start getting serious about a built in antivirus and firewall. They are going to get hit on the antitrust issue again. They don't get seen as taking security seriously they get bad press as well. So no matter what they do. There will be issues brought up by users. And Microsoft has yet to do the one thing that would in fact give them good PR. Let users have the choice to uninstall some built in features. Such as IE, Windows Media, Messenger, the built in firewall etc.
--
Test Your Security Team Z Member Cable Modem Diagnostics | |
|
| shuubz
A Good Kind Of Pain
join:2001-02-12
Dexter, MI
|  90-day waiting period
I'll wait until they figure it out.
After 15 years of supporting this stuff, I'll pass on the Soylent Green for now, thanks.
--
FCCk the FCC: Look, an indecency for Powell the Corporate Whore to censor...What is left for the meek is not worth having...I don't need a shepherd, I need a Muse...The only thing I can call my own is who I am; insecurity is pointless. | |
|
| | wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | Re: 90-day waiting period Finally, a voice of sanity. After 17 years of system support, I concur. You are asking for issues if you don't wait. If you can spare your time and data, then go for it. My main PC will not recieve SP2 for a while.
puritan | |
|
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs: | Someone should mention That this article is about Windows XP, in case you're wondering. Microsoft has loads of products, just saying SP2 is meaningless.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. | |
|
| 
ape
join:2002-05-10
Chicago, IL | Re: Someone should mention The new IE browser is a lot safer. Now it displays a msg bar if a site you going to is trying to do any changes to your system. | |
|
| |
Neil
Stop All The Downloadin
join:2003-08-20
New York, NY | who cares? I don't understand what the big deal is if people don't want to use IE. Who cares? Whether people use Firefox, or IE, or Lynx, Microsoft doesn't lose anything either way. | |
|
wbhigdon
join:2003-10-29
Bessemer, AL | SP2 but what about W2K Well I have 80 or 90 WXP boxes. They'll get
SP2. However W2K is still a supported product.
What about my 30 or 40 W2K Boxes???
It's not like we're asking for new features
just security updates.. Sheesh. | |
|
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| Re: SP2 but what about W2K said by wbhigdon :
What about my 30 or 40 W2K Boxes???
Looks like you gotta go purchase 30 or 40 WinXP licenses  | |
|
| | wbhigdon
join:2003-10-29
Bessemer, AL
| Re: SP2 but what about W2K said by pnh102 :
said by wbhigdon :
What about my 30 or 40 W2K Boxes???
Looks like you gotta go purchase 30 or 40 WinXP licenses
Well in the mean time... I guess i'll turn us into a
FireFox Shop.. IE is so easy to manage via AD. | |
|
| | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| While I don't like the fact that you may need to upgrade a working solution, you probably should consider upgrading to XP. Nothing lasts forever and most manufactures only provide free fixes for a reasonable period of time. My organization still has a few 98 and NT workstations. We realize that they need to go since the hardware is ready to die even if the OS is still providing an adequate solution.
Regarding the IE alternatives, this is nothing more than the press hyping alternatives. Everyone loves an underdog but the sad truth is that when the alternatives gain press coverage, it only supports Microsoft's claims that competition is tough and courts aren't needed to fertilize innovation.
So -- if you want to use a different browser, go right ahead but you're doing exactly what Microsoft needs to maintain their dominance. You create the illusion of competition in a market that Microsoft ruthlessly dominates. | |
|
| | | wbhigdon
join:2003-10-29
Bessemer, AL
| Re: SP2 but what about W2K said by rradina :
While I don't like the fact that you may need to upgrade a working solution, you probably should consider upgrading to XP. Nothing lasts forever and most manufactures only provide free fixes for a reasonable period of time. My organization still has a few 98 and NT workstations. We realize that they need to go since the hardware is ready to die even if the OS is still providing an adequate solution.
Yes but W2K is still a supported current solution on
M'Soft roadmap. W98/NT is not supported. Not providing
patches for a product that isnt at End of Life according
to M'soft's roadmap is just plain wrong.
said by rradina :
Regarding the IE alternatives, this is nothing more than the press hyping alternatives.
Perhaps the press hypes things. However CERT's advisery
has merit. If IE has flaws that M'soft will not fix
it seems another browser would be in order...
said by rradina :
Everyone loves an underdog but the sad truth is that when the alternatives gain press coverage, it only supports Microsoft's claims that competition is tough and courts aren't needed to fertilize innovation.
So -- if you want to use a different browser, go right ahead but you're doing exactly what Microsoft needs to maintain their dominance. You create the illusion of competition in a market that Microsoft ruthlessly dominates.
Above and beyond my concern... If CERT is fussing about
IE then my concern is my network. The whole monopoly
debate doesnt enter into that. | |
|
| | | | hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH | Re: SP2 but what about W2K Nobody but MS knows how long that W2K will be supported. They can up and release a statement that says it will only be supported for the next 2 months and then thats the end of it. So why not just update and get it over with? | |
|
| | | | | wbhigdon
join:2003-10-29
Bessemer, AL
| Re: SP2 but what about W2K said by hottboiinnc :
Nobody but MS knows how long that W2K will be supported. They can up and release a statement that says it will only be supported for the next 2 months and then thats the end of it. So why not just update and get it over with?
»support.microsoft.com/default.as···;LifeWin
They have promised publicly to support customers till 6/30/2005 with mainstream support. IT depts plan upgrades
and purchase around such things... What is planned and
should happen is M'soft issues fixes as promised and I get
to hold off upgrading till next year to coincide with
the scheduled machine refresh. | |
|
| | | | | | hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH | Re: SP2 but what about W2K They may promise but don't mean they will. and as far as them planning upgrades don't hold your breath. They're more worried about SP2 and Longhorn not W2K. | |
|
| | | | | | | wbhigdon
join:2003-10-29
Bessemer, AL
| Re: SP2 but what about W2K said by hottboiinnc :
They may promise but don't mean they will. and as far as them planning upgrades don't hold your breath. They're more worried about SP2 and Longhorn not W2K.
They're so worried about it to leave unpatched
vulnerabilities and a cert warning...
W2K is still a supported product. If you think
Cert's browser recommendations caused a newsflash
could you imagine a Cert recommendation to not use
M'Soft OSes???
They'll plug the holes in W2K. They'll plug em in
XP. They just will not be quick about either. | |
|
| | | | | | | | hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH | Re: SP2 but what about W2K They surely won't be in a hurrt to patch Win 2K XP is the new baby of the MS Windows family. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | wbhigdon
join:2003-10-29
Bessemer, AL
| Re: SP2 but what about W2K said by hottboiinnc :
They surely won't be in a hurrt to patch Win 2K XP is the new baby of the MS Windows family.
Heck they havent even patched XP. They have OEMs
still distributing it ie IBM. They arent going
to upset them. | |
|
| | | hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable
| Thats true with MS claiming they have competition. If other ppl use other products that MS has then MS will always stay the way it is.
But not many people understand that. Especially with AOL. AOL operates the "out side world" in IE while keeping its "world" in their own format. | |
|
| | | 8744675
join:2000-10-10
Decatur, GA
| When Microsoft either offers a Windows install with NO internet browser tied to the core OS, or offers a choice of what browser to use (IE or 3rd party) during installation, then we will have a competetive market place. And that doesn't mean installing IE and just hiding the icons and disabling a few DLL's like they do now with IE and Media Player, it means NO component of either is present or tied to Windows. We run several networked production servers and workstations at work that do nothing but run batch jobs for our electronic print & mail service. If they go down, we don't have a job. They have no need for Internet Explorer, Media Player or any other of the junk they have built in that can't be completely removed or disabled, yet there have been times when a machine would not boot or run properly because a DLL used by IE or Media player got corrupted and won't load.
Microsoft has shot themselves in the foot by embedding such a high security risk application like IE to an OS that is used in millions of mission critical environments every day. I'm sure their early utopian vision was having every PC connected online to share information and use the latest software by selling annual web service subscriptions for Office Suite and other applications using a client-server model.
It would be a win, win situation for Microsoft since web apps would would reduce software piracy, save the cost of producing, packaging and marketing their boxed versions, reduce their support costs by only having to support only the current web version of each product. In addition, it would eliminate those users who never upgrade their applications for years unless it's forced upon them, which helps guarantee Microsoft a steady annual revenue stream.
What Microsoft failed to see is that the Internet would turn into the cesspool that it is today, and their OS has dropped anchor right smack in the middle of it! Now their solution model is to patch, patch, patch and keep building bigger fences around the OS to keep the undesirables out. It's time for Microsoft to give up on their outdated utopian vision of having everyone 'connected'. It's human nature that if you build a fence to protect something, someone is going to assume there's something of value behind it and try to get through it. If there's no fence, there's no perception of anything of value, and no more incentive for someone to try. Microsoft needs to stop building fences and instead remove the non-essential bloat that provides the means for unauthorized access to a computer. | |
|
| | | | Deathsadvoca
join:2003-08-20
South Lyon, MI
clubs:
| Re: SP2 but what about W2K " And that doesn't mean installing IE and just hiding the icons and disabling a few DLL's like they do now with IE and Media Player, it means NO component of either is present or tied to Windows."
Why should Microsoft be forced to change there Entire OS because someone doesent like any of IE's or media players componits in there operating system? Its not like Microsoft has just suddenly tied these to the OS. they have been a part of the os since 95. the simple awnser is if you dont want IE or MP on your computer at all move to linux or Mac. | |
|
| | | | | 
antwanp
Hoo Hoo, Fred. I invented everything
Premium
join:2002-05-14
Cedar Hill, TX
clubs: | Re: SP2 but what about W2K Finally, someone with some sense!
-Antwan L. | |
|
| | | | | wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH
| It is also part of the reason for the Antitrust suit against Microsoft. Because they do not offer a level playing field to 3rd party software developers. That is the main reason why some programs don't seem to work as well as MS programs. Microsoft make sure that they do not.
puritan | |
|
| | | | Samwoo
join:2002-02-15
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
| How exactly is ie connected to windows?
From my point of view disabling a few dlls means getting rid of internet explorer. because simply put it. ie really is only a few dlls.
windows has the nt core which runs explorer and a bunch of other services and
as far as i can see internet explorer is simply a few graphics and a dll attached to explorer to provide html reading and internet connection.
so what do you mean by getting rid of internet explorer?
do you also want to get rid of explorer?
in that case just run windows in command prompt only mode i guess. | |
|
| | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| The last time I installed something on our AIX box, the instructions were in HTML format. I could have installed Netscape and read them via X-terminal but I didn't bother since my PC had a browser. However, in a pure Unix environment, I'd have to be doing just that.
The browser is ubiquitous. Microsoft is not wrong for including it in the base OS. I'm sure tomorrow we might say the same about a media player. Microsoft's mistake is making them tightly coupled so it's difficult or impossible to separate from the OS. I feel that we only have our wonderful DOJ to blame for this. (NOTE: I'm not saying their case was without merit but the outcome certainly didn't help the consumer. It was merely another tobacco trial where the states received boat loads of money at a time when their budgets were a disaster.) Microsoft embarked on this path to ensure that these services were impossible to separate and therefore could not easily be unbundled. It wasn't because that design was best. It was because this design protected them from the courts. Right now I don't think this is true of media services but if worldwide courts keep hammering the point, you'll soon need the media player for explorer to work properly because MS will animate the folders and require some sort of MPEG decompression algorithm from the "media services subsystem".
We also have critical services running on Windows. File & Print, Exchange, imaging, Intranet (even though it's BEA WebLogic), extranet, Internet proxy, etc. The last time we had a problem was blaster and that's because we failed to apply known patches. That was our wake-up call. We now patch almost as soon as they are released.
Other than sloppy programming, the problem with Microsoft is it's just like the U.S. and the extreme Muslim terrorists. The U.S. is hated because of its success and the freedom that we represent. Therefore we (as Microsoft) are a target. Not just by script kiddies, hacks and digital terrorists, but from our own government. Politicians see a big pile of cash and they want to figure out a way to exploit it, not in service to the public, but for their own gains.
Just look at what happens to Wal-Mart these days when they want to grow into a new location? Even though they will save the community money by providing the same products coupled with a superior service at a far cheaper price, towns now vote to place maximum sizes (square footage) on any business -- ensuring that Wal-Mart cannot build there. What the hell has gone with our government when crap like this happens? Do you think it's all people getting things like this passed? No. It's a core group of retailers singing a pity song. Then the entire community pays for it.
Bottom line: Microsoft isn't going to patch W2K to the level of XP because it's a legacy product. I know that's not what anyone wants to hear but it's a no-win situation for MS. If they were to update W2K with an "SP2-like" update, people would be bitch up a storm in the opposite direction. Daily complaints of "Microsoft broke my computer" would emanate from the masses. Why? XP SP2 will likely cause a lot of support headaches because it will make various insecure connections the exception instead of the norm. Regardless of planning, it's going to break things until everyone figures out what holes need to be drilled. | |
|
Mactron
el Camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv
| May not have to wait for Longhorn. Suse 9.1 Personal ISO is now available. Down loaded it, burnt it, installed it. Looks pretty good so far. If the Linux community keeps going at this rate, there will be no further need for MS Windows, sooner than we may think. Could the next widely installed OS in this household be Linux !?? The Yast Control center works well, installs and updates smoothly. I've been using MS since DOS 3.1 through XP, (NOT ME) . The time to say good bye is looming ?
--
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. Aldous Huxley | |
|
| |
| | hottboiinnc
Kyle
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH | Re: May not have to wait for Longhorn. I'd like to know the same? And not to get farther off the track but MS will always be the home user desk-top because people are afraid of change, they know Windows too well. | |
|
| |
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK
 ·Cingular Wireless
| Advice I think a lot of the FUDmongers around here need to install SP2 RC2 before mouthing off about how crappy XP is. SP2 is the frickin cat's meow. Besides the security (which I think is too strict BTW), the new Bluetooth support is the best thing I've ever seen. Like getting a new OS. | |
|
|
storm64007
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Freeport, NY
edit:
July 4th, @12:43PM
| Re: Advice said by inteller :
I think a lot of the FUDmongers around here need to install SP2 RC2 before mouthing off about how crappy XP is. SP2 is the frickin cat's meow. Besides the security (which I think is too strict BTW), the new Bluetooth support is the best thing I've ever seen. Like getting a new OS.
Agreed. I think its a big step foward and really like sp2 rc2 in both security and stability. | |
|
| |
antiphishing
Nigerian 419 Scam Baiter
Premium
join:2004-06-09
Wilkes Barre, PA
edit:
July 4th, @01:26PM
| Windows XP Billion Bill should have fixed all these security issues/exploits before Microsoft released Windows XP Home and Professional editions.
It's a shame that people still haven't learned yet that anything Microsoft develops as far as software is always prone to problems. How many naive people who buy new computer from Dell or Gateway install critical updates , use a firewall or use some type of virus scan software. You can't just expect people to do regular maintenance on their computers on a daily basis. Hacker and spammers know this fact and will continue to find exploits in Microsoft products.
»www.antihotmail.com
spammers_are_scumbags@antihotmail.com
| |
|
|
See 25 replies to this post |
|
MWR2NY
join:2002-02-06
Edgewood, MD
| Maybe it's Me I don't buy my gas at the same gas station. I don't my groceries at the same store why should I believe that an operating system is sufficient to secure itself? SP2 is not going to do anymore to secure a system that you can't do already through other products that are currently available. I will always protect my network with a firewall both hardware and software and a anti-virus program that can have updates and guess what? Microsoft's SP2 can't even detect these programs are running. Don't ever assume that buying everything through one supplier is the best course of action. A Microsoft operating system running through a linksys router with a Sygate software firewall and a Symantec Anti-virus running real-time detection has given me a warm fuzzy feeling of protection and allows me to do all my task that my computer system is suppose to do without fear of being intruded or invaded. | |
|
| 
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| Re: Maybe it's Me said by MWR2NY :
I will always protect my network with a firewall both hardware and software and a anti-virus program that can have updates and guess what? Microsoft's SP2 can't even detect these programs are running.
That's not Microsoft's fault. You need to bug the people who make those programs, so that they can update them to be compatible with SP2's Secuity Center. | |
|
| | MWR2NY
join:2002-02-06
Edgewood, MD | Re: Maybe it's Me I would rather not worry about the detection of SP2. For the programs to be compatibly, they may have to rewrite the code that could lead to vonablilties. Let MS XP operate and the other programs guard my system against MS and the bad guys. | |
|
rstrandb
Premium
join:2003-04-17
Albany, GA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| SP2 seems good for me I've been using SP2 for a couple weeks, all seems great with me. For noobs, the fact that it monitors things such as your firewall and anti-virus is really good. Maybe some people will get the idea that those things are important.
--
Remember....beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes straight to the bone. | |
|
| sterilegenie
Onebase Linux
join:2001-06-07
Deltona, FL
clubs:
| Re: SP2 seems good for me Well why does sp2 break norton av? It wont automatically start at boot time, wont update via automatic update or manual, and sp2 wont allow you to uninstall nav either. Take sp2 off the machine and viola, everything works again. Is ms forcing me to use another av company? | |
|
| |
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| Re: SP2 seems good for me said by sterilegenie :
Well why does sp2 break norton av? It wont automatically start at boot time, wont update via automatic update or manual, and sp2 wont allow you to uninstall nav either. Take sp2 off the machine and viola, everything works again. Is ms forcing me to use another av company?
That's a problem with your computer. I've been running NAV since I first started with SP2 back in November, and I've had no problems with it. | |
|
| | | sterilegenie
Onebase Linux
join:2001-06-07
Deltona, FL
clubs:
| Re: SP2 seems good for me That's a problem with your computer. I've been running NAV since I first started with SP2 back in November, and I've had no problems with it. Did you read.... Take sp2 off the machine and viola, everything works again. Now how can that be a problem with my computer? | |
|
| | | |
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| Re: SP2 seems good for me OK, let me rephrase what I said: It's a problem specific to your computer. SP2 is still beta software, so you should use the "Report a bug" link on your desktop and let Microsoft know that it was causing this problem for you. I'm just telling you that this isn't some widespread issue with SP2. | |
|
hedyd4u
Premium
join:2003-12-16
Schenectady, NY
| Keep pushing the other operating systems As long as people champion other OSes Microsoft will work to better its products faster. They will never change from their policy of get it out first bad or not until they are not #1. Bill has made a fortune from being first not the best.
Linux has a long way to go before it can challenge MS in the average user market, who know very little about computers. The average users outnumber the knowledgeable by a wide margin. The people most likely to use non MS products have built a computer on their own and are willing to tweak the system themselves.
Have not updated to SP2 yet but will after reading the down-sides to minimize aggravation.
For all who scream about security, remember nothing is secure as long as dishonest people exist.
HACKERS ARE THE BAD GUYS HERE NO ONE ELSE. | |
|
| iffy
join:2004-02-07
Columbus, OH
| Re: Keep pushing the other operating systems When has MS *ever* been first out with a product? They usually are the responder, not the initiator. Look at everything they put out: Windows, Word, I.E., MSN, Searchbar, etc. MS waits till there is a market and then jumps in, they are never first. | |
|
|
Will SP2 Be Enough?
