...Service pack... why o' why?

Buckethead · Thu 04/10/2007 11:22:26

hey,

I was wondering why so many programs require service pack 2 or later to be installed before they can be installed themselfs. I wouldn't really mind if service pack wasn't such a pain to work with.

I really want to dodge the fact that some programs ask for service pack. I know it's not really needed. And I'm not doing anything illigal by not installing it.

pff why does service pack want to make my lonely pc live so miserable

:

Radiant · Thu 04/10/2007 11:27:20

Obviously, for the same reason that older versions of MS Office are "unable" to read documents written by newer versions.

SSH · Thu 04/10/2007 11:37:21

Why would you not want your PC to have the least-hackable (i.e. fully updated) version of Windows XP?

m0ds · Thu 04/10/2007 12:35:00

Speaking of which it's just turned another period of having to have a certain Internet Explorer for MSN to work, and basic Hotmail seems to have been completely abandoned. Gash

Buckethead · Thu 04/10/2007 14:36:03

Quote from: SSH on Thu 04/10/2007 11:37:21
Why would you not want your PC to have the least-hackable (i.e. fully updated) version of Windows XP?

I would want it but the things service pack does are just so anoing. Popping up messages with everything you do online. I would rather pick my own programs for it rather then that I get forced to use service pack.

Inkoddi · Thu 04/10/2007 15:11:39

You CAN disable the windows firewall and all that you know. It's somewhere under security in the control panel somewhere.

Ozzie · Thu 04/10/2007 16:21:13

Or you can disable the services (firewall, security center) per msconfig.

Buckethead · Thu 04/10/2007 17:18:03

Well I don't want to be forced into using a program and I don't feel like disabling half of the functions.

DoorKnobHandle · Thu 04/10/2007 17:30:11

Or is your Windows copy maybe stolen and you can't install SP2? :

No offense, but "I don't feel like disabling half the functions" doesn't make a lot sense to me - if you want to run programs that require SP2, then install the pack or leave it be, your decision. It's a fact, though (as people have told you), that SP2 does not force you to use any programs or anything, it's mainly a security update.

If you are not motivated to use it and disable the functions you don't want, you're not gonna be able to install the software that requires it. Easy as pie.

Radiant · Thu 04/10/2007 17:39:48

Quote from: dkh on Thu 04/10/2007 17:30:11
If you are not motivated to use it and disable the functions you don't want, you're not gonna be able to install the software that requires it. Easy as pie.

Well, yes, but he has a point in that the software that "requires" it probably doesn't really, but the installer is crippled to refuse to work without the presence of the service pack.

Buckethead · Thu 04/10/2007 17:50:24

Quote from: dkh on Thu 04/10/2007 17:30:11
Or is your Windows copy maybe stolen and you can't install SP2? :

well no but even if it was I could still install some hack to make it install anyway.... I just don't want that evul service pack

Tuomas · Thu 04/10/2007 18:37:41

it's not the sp2 that's evil, it's the version you're using.

LGM · Thu 04/10/2007 19:24:36

SP2 is wonderful and I have no idea why you do not want it. If those things bother you, disable them like a grown boy or stop complaining. Yeesh.

I'm using VISTA and I'm not even complaining. Once you disable some of the junk it's wonderful.

mouthuvmine · Thu 04/10/2007 20:14:45

Does really matter why? I don't know whyyy I have to where shoes into a 7/11. I surely don't want to wear them in. But I DOOO want a slurpee, so I live with it.

MillsJROSS · Thu 04/10/2007 21:47:40

QuoteWhy would you not want your PC to have the least-hackable (i.e. fully updated) version of Windows XP?

Personally, I did have SP2, but every windows update kept slowing down my system. So to me it's about speed. Plus, I don't do anything fancy on my computer.

-MillsJROSS

InCreator · Fri 05/10/2007 03:18:45

SP2 has its pros and cons, but generally, if you're running on a system that meets Windows XP requirements and copy of XP is legal, there is actually no serious reason not to upgrade. It doesn't change much how Win looks and works, just your Add/Remove programs list will be trashed a bit. And you probably have to turn off nuisances here and there.

From your story, I kind of suspect your copy being pirated one. Why not be glad to get something extra to something you paid for? Like extra stability and bugfixes etc?

With illegal copy, of course, things are different. I was running on pirated XP Pro for 2 years and problems concerning SP2 and "windows genuine advatange" crap Microsoft invented somewhere during this made things slightly more difficult. My suggestion: not worth the hassle. Most of the hacks either don't work, install trojans or simply quit working after some time. With XP dying in few years, you can buy quite cheap legal version of Windows XP Home and enjoy carefree life with your PC. I mean it.

monkey0506 · Fri 05/10/2007 18:49:24

On the note of illegal copies of Windows XP, I once came across a "genuinizer", unfortunately it had to be run every time you turned on the computer.

Not that I've ever needed it, my stepdad bought the full version of Win XP Home when we built this computer years ago (probably about 5 years ago) and it's the only computer I really have access to anyway...so.

Mantra of Doom · Sat 06/10/2007 02:03:12

If speed is your issue, once you install all updates go ahead and google "XP tweaks" and see the long list of websites that tell you what you can disable and how to do it.

Two websites that I found useful are Tweak XP and Doug's Windows Tweaks

We all know Windows has its junk in it, and if you hate that then either buy a Mac or install Linux, which each has its own set of pros and cons.

covox · Sun 07/10/2007 16:37:57

There's scarce little reason to avoid using a Service Pack. Service Packs are lovely, round, bubbly things full of hotfixes that really should have been in the final product but turned up a belated 3 or 4 years on. This Service Pack contained such luxuries as a real Bluetooth stack (instead of an imaginary one), slightly less shit support for exotic USB mass storage devices, and even a pissweak firewall to give you false hope about browsing dodgy sites in safety with IE.

SP2 even unbuggered wireless support to make it work 80% of the time, improving on the previous Microsoft record of 24.8% with a tail wind. This, along with the scientific fact that Service Packs don't noticeably destroy system performance, is reason enough to migrate from the 5-year-old SP1. Or, Christ forbid, an unpatched first-edition XP install from October 2001.

The "popping up messages with everything you do online" can be disabled by clicking a checkbox in the "Security" section of Control Panel. Or by using Mozilla Firefox. If you can't deal with WGA, ask someone competent to find a crack for you.

voh · Mon 08/10/2007 01:31:20

covox?

I love you

...Service pack... why o' why?

m0ds