Advertisement

#1 Posted by worzle on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:22

What build number is this one? ...49 still?

(2 replies) #2 Posted by Xenomorph on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:23

neat

#2.1 Posted by frogworm on 16 Jun 2004 - 09:22

omg, where have j00 been?!

#2.2 Posted by [ timko ] on 16 Jun 2004 - 15:26

lol

#3 Posted by EvErSoR on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:25

What is this. Im a german beta Tester and they can't get a german rc2 build on the beta homepage but they release it for the public?

I mean its basically the same... but why ms?

(4 replies) #4 Posted by geetarbill on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:30

So far after installing this just about everything runs slower and a lot of the stuff in the control panel no longer works. I get errors for just about everything. Be careful.

#4.1 Posted by Sim31 on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:59

Possibly you got to many things in the background that is open or you possibly got some spyware doing it..

#4.2 Posted by virtorio on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:18

I found previous builds of Service Pack 2 to slow down my system as well.

I didn't experence any problems with Control Panel Applets though.

#4.3 Posted by geetarbill on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:38

I just installed on a fresh install of xp and it's working great so far.

#4.4 Posted by [ timko ] on 16 Jun 2004 - 15:29

Sounds good

(1 reply) #5 Posted by McGazza on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:34

Well ive installed it and its running better then the other previous versions

#5.1 Posted by [ timko ] on 16 Jun 2004 - 15:27

Fingers crossed this works ok for me. Gonna put it on my sister's PC first

(1 reply) #6 Posted by pappadj on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:37

everything works great here... 3 system installs. Actually seems more stable now. Thanks for the heads up Neowin! You guys ROX!!!!!

German Releases are on the site... a few clicks could get you there. Here's the link for you though... make sure you notice it on the right. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/sp2predl.mspx

Yes, the build is 2149.

#6.1 Posted by EvErSoR on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:58

i know its on the technet site as a public rc. I just complained that there is no german build on the offcial beta site (windowsbeta.microsoft.com). See im a betatester but i have to download the public rc to get my language version. Whats that about....

#7 Posted by hardgiant on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:40

slower and buggy doesn't sound good to me.

#8 Posted by 98XT on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:41

Installing drivers was a bit errr ... but running smoothly now.

#9 Posted by DELTA75329 on 15 Jun 2004 - 21:43

Whoa... thought this was final for a sec. "Download via Windows Update"
Oi gay... I need more sleep.

(6 replies) #10 Posted by ZEROarmy on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:05

DLing at 384KB/Sec! (Comcast speed cap!)


Does anyone know if it has NX????????????????????????????????

#10.1 Posted by Mav Phoenix on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:42

Does anyone know why you need so many question marks?

#10.2 Posted by ZEROarmy on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:48

Cause it is a very important question for Athlon 64 owners.

#10.3 Posted by Dapper on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:31

QUOTE (#10.2)

Posted by ZEROarmy on 16 Jun 2004 - 03:48 Cause it is a very important question for Athlon 64 owners.

Then I suggest you wait for the 64bit version of XP to be finalised and released then worry about it then. Least you wont be downgrading your OS then

#10.4 Posted by incubusdaemon on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:32

NX has been in the code for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooong time now.

one o for each ?

#10.5 Posted by ZEROarmy on 16 Jun 2004 - 13:56

k, thanks

#10.6 Posted by nonick on 16 Jun 2004 - 20:31

QUOTE

NX has been in the code for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooong time now. one o for each ?

are you telling me that you counted those question marks?!

#11 Posted by jameseuk on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:30

Yay finally I can update to RC2 using an express installer

(6 replies) #12 Posted by DrOmango on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:38

i wonder if this will work on devils own copy without being blocked :p

#12.1 Posted by divertom15 on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:42

it will provided that its done properly. And i cant say any more than that

#12.2 Posted by nullie on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:02

Works fine with the right product ID (640).

#12.3 Posted by raid517 on 16 Jun 2004 - 00:07

Mmm... have you ever considered suicide too? Since that's exactly what your doing by printing this information.

I don't get people like this. I mean how dumb can you be? First you admit to stealing software - and then you tell everyone, including the company in question how you did it.

Pretty frikin stoopid if you ask me.

GJ

#12.4 Posted by DsnBehind on 16 Jun 2004 - 02:25

QUOTE (#12.0)

i wonder if this will work on devils own copy without being blocked

Yes, it will.

No, don't ask me how.

#12.5 Posted by gawdflesh on 16 Jun 2004 - 04:41

QUOTE (#12.3)

Mmm... have you ever considered suicide too? Since that's exactly what your doing by printing this information. I don't get people like this. I mean how dumb can you be? First you admit to stealing software - and then you tell everyone, including the company in question how you did it.

That's not very nice.

First off, he didn't say anything about how it was done. All he said was that it needed a certain PID. Big deal. Chances are, if a person knows what that means to begin with, they probably already know quite well what to do. Not like news pertaining to this specific subject hasn't been posted on the front page of this site before. So calm down.

#12.6 Posted by Samoth on 16 Jun 2004 - 11:54

SP2 was installed without problems with a PID different from 640 (got 644 here)

(4 replies) #13 Posted by mrk on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:46

say "my friend" already updated to sp2 build 2126 and wanted 2149 - can this still be done :p

btw "my friend" has 5 mins left on the DL

/me prays for friends PC not to fudge up activation even though sp2 last time created a valid activation key and such like o_o

#13.1 Posted by McGazza on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:00

1) Yes he can
2) It downloads in about 10 mins
3) He may be asked to activate again if you use a coroporate edition

#13.2 Posted by nullie on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:06

You can do it if you uninstall build 2126, but I recommend doing a clean install.

#13.3 Posted by whitedragon on 16 Jun 2004 - 08:01

My Corp Ed didn't ask to reactivate...

#13.4 Posted by nullie on 16 Jun 2004 - 18:46

It won't if you have a good product ID.

(7 replies) #14 Posted by Slyph on 15 Jun 2004 - 22:56

i get 1.60 mb downloaded then it fails? what gives?

#14.1 Posted by McGazza on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:00

Server is very busy at the moment i rekon

#14.2 Posted by Cøbra on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:49

same here, wats up with that ?

#14.3 Posted by egar on 16 Jun 2004 - 00:49

Did your download fail or just appear to hang up? Mine appeared to hang at 1.6 mb but I think that it downloaded 1.6 mb of stuff and then did some analysis of my system. When it resumed downloading after a few minutes the size of the download dropped from 100 mb to 95.8 mb.

#14.4 Posted by 1ceman1 on 16 Jun 2004 - 09:01

I've got the same problem, it fails doesn't hang

#14.5 Posted by [ timko ] on 16 Jun 2004 - 15:29

Tryr grabbing the 263Mb network install instead? At least that way if it ever fugs up you don't have to download again

#14.6 Posted by jameseuk on 16 Jun 2004 - 17:13

same here

#14.7 Posted by jameseuk on 16 Jun 2004 - 17:26

It seems my install is going again, total download size for me is 79.70mb,bit odd that it stopped though

(1 reply) #15 Posted by mrk on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:04

hm it says i must uninstall the old sp2 first befoire installig the new one

eep!

#15.1 Posted by Octol on 16 Jun 2004 - 08:15

On one computer I've installed three versions one on top of the other—2138, 2142, and 2149—without any problems at all. But then again I didn't install or reconfigure a bunch of stuff between builds on that system, either: a situation that might make a difference.

In any case, the times I did have to uninstall SP2 on a given system—even quite old versions—it always uninstalled quickly and perfectly.

(1 reply) #16 Posted by thenewbrgnewman on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:16

just a question due to i know that all of my friends use Xp Pro off of Kazaa. Well Sp2 RC2 install or well it not?

#16.1 Posted by laz45 on 15 Jun 2004 - 23:23

Only if they have a valid cd-key and i doubt that

(2 replies) #17 Posted by ROsCo on 16 Jun 2004 - 00:17

Found a pretty annoying bug (i don't know if it's just me):

After installing RC2, I can log into accounts that are under the 'Administrators' group with no problem. Everything works fine. BUT, when I try to log into an account that's under the "Users" group... while logging on, explorer.exe crashes with a strange "application failed to initialize..." error and all that loads is the desktop, minus the icons, task bar etc etc. Later, when i give that same account administrator privileges (Control Panel> User Accounts> Change Account Type> Computer Administrator)... everything works fine.

This might be an issue for those who use limited user accounts to give their children/younger brother/sister limited access to the computer.

Did anyone else bump into this "bug" ?

#17.1 Posted by McGazza on 16 Jun 2004 - 12:42

Nope i dont get that error

#17.2 Posted by ROsCo on 16 Jun 2004 - 19:41

Dang... I should have done a clean install... except for that error I'm getting... RC2's running smooooooooth

(1 reply) #18 Posted by Cøbra on 16 Jun 2004 - 01:09

http://download.microsoft.com/download/C/1/6/C169BA60-E2D6-4C5F-B4F2-23DA024C9FA8/xpSP2.exe
quote from microsoft newsgroups (announcements): "thats the direct link to the 263mb full file"

#18.1 Posted by Octol on 16 Jun 2004 - 08:21

Here's the page with the various download links plus release notes and so on:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/sp2predl.mspx

(2 replies) #19 Posted by Eth3l on 16 Jun 2004 - 01:09

I Installed it on my tablet PC. it works well. the additions to handwriting tools are HUGE!! New interface and when I Put my "Pen over a text area u button appears to open thetext in Put Panel. the text input Panel is Intuitive, and Powerful. I basically wrote The is Post in hand writing in thecomment box. twosome. it is easier to us the Pen for Drafting emails, etc.

#19.1 Posted by jwoair23 on 16 Jun 2004 - 04:08

lol it may be better but may I suggest proofreading your input still

#19.2 Posted by djtaylor on 16 Jun 2004 - 08:05

Are you German, by any chance? Not all nouns start with capital letters in English.

(1 reply) #20 Posted by Blax on 16 Jun 2004 - 01:21

w00t it has a popup blocker! lol

#20.1 Posted by kaffra on 16 Jun 2004 - 02:38

aah yes i forgot about that

(2 replies) #21 Posted by Manksgloob on 16 Jun 2004 - 02:09

Is anyone else having problems with highlighting/selecting any .mpg or .avi?
explorer.exe or any other program (premiere, wmp, etc) that opens those extensions seem to crash for me whenever i'm browsing in a folder that contains those files.

#21.1 Posted by egar on 16 Jun 2004 - 02:18

It's working OK for me.

#21.2 Posted by mnemonic on 16 Jun 2004 - 14:44

This is a known issue with XP and large (>1GB) .avi/.mpeg files when you have the Common Tasks/Preview pane activated in Folder Options; there's a Hotfix available for .avi's- see KB article Q822430. Unfortunately it doesn't help with mpegs, so your only option (that I know of) is to disable the CT pane in Win Explorer.

(2 replies) #22 Posted by Genesi on 16 Jun 2004 - 03:20

Does any one else think that their computer is faster with SP2 installed? It sure seems like it to me. However, there are three things I really like about this build (keep in mind I havn't tried Service Pack 2 since RC1):

1. You don't have to install any updates. Pretty obvious but you did have to download 50+ megabytes for patches before SP2. It also now installs the AMD cpu processor (not sure what this does), which RC1 didn't

2. In the Add/Remove programs you can hide updates that you install.

3. Thankfully, you can now hide the information bar for pop ups. Prior to this, it got very annoying to see that bar every time it blocked an add.

All in all good work Microsoft!

#22.1 Posted by Grope for Luna on 16 Jun 2004 - 05:07

A fresh install is always faster so that's probably the most significant difference you're noticing.

#22.2 Posted by djtaylor on 16 Jun 2004 - 08:02

You could configure IE not to display the information bar in RC1 too.

(4 replies) #23 Posted by HoochieMamma on 16 Jun 2004 - 03:25

Has anyone else noticed the boot screen for XP Pro changes to "Windows XP" and doesnt say professional or home or anything else? And also you are unable to install WMP 10?

#23.1 Posted by Genesi on 16 Jun 2004 - 03:42

Confirmed, hehe -- I'm using the Home Edition, logging and boot only says windows xP. Oh well, noticed boot up times are fastert though.

#23.2 Posted by incubusdaemon on 16 Jun 2004 - 07:57

wmp10 installed and worked fine for me.

#23.3 Posted by theMaxx on 16 Jun 2004 - 16:16

Is the silly progress bar still blue in Pro and green in home?

#23.4 Posted by jhaygood86 on 19 Jun 2004 - 03:49

Its blue in both. The only place where it has the edition now is in winver and in System Properties (as far as I know). However, the restrictions Windows XP Home Edition have still exist.

(2 replies) #24 Posted by l0g0ut on 16 Jun 2004 - 03:59

Hmm... BSOD after system restart. Google does not reveal answer. Something about ntfs.sys that crash the system. Point me to the right direction to find answers.

#24.1 Posted by djtaylor on 17 Jun 2004 - 07:53

Well, considering that this had been out less than 24 hours at the time you posted, there's hardly likely to be an answer for Google to find, is there??!

#24.2 Posted by riahc3 on 17 Jun 2004 - 15:44

did u have Windows X Longhorn Transformation Pack installed? If you do your f*cked. Format time.

(11 replies) #25 Posted by columbus57 on 16 Jun 2004 - 04:14

I already installed the Win XP SP-2 RC-2 and now I've got some incompatibility issues. (#1)Spybot S&D 1.3 refuses to open when I try to start it (#2)-Neither my Norton AV 2004 nor my Norton FW 2004 work anymore under SP-2 (#3)-My network connection with Comcast Cable-Modem is missing in action (may be because the Win XP FIREWALL?) so I'm using my brother's PC to type this. (#4) My system seems to freeze up when booting or when shutting down.
I archived the SP-2 files that was offered to me as an option while installing it.
So, can I safely remove it from my system and get my PC to what it was before the update or doing so is gonna mess up my system even more?

btw: I never installed the RC-1

#25.1 Posted by pdoconnell on 16 Jun 2004 - 05:45

I think there was something in the changenotes on Microsoft's website about how you have to update antivirus to the newest versions BEFORE installing SP2 or there will be problems. Too lazy to read them again...

#25.2 Posted by SouL2kEEp on 16 Jun 2004 - 06:22

He uses NAV 2004.. do you know of a later version than that?
Now who is too lazy to read?

#25.3 Posted by incubusdaemon on 16 Jun 2004 - 07:56

I'm using XP- ever heard of a later version than that? Oh yeah SP1 or SP2. They are called 'patches'

#25.4 Posted by whitedragon on 16 Jun 2004 - 08:03

Spybot S&D 1.3 works fine for me...Works well with Zone Alarm AV as well...

#25.5 Posted by columbus57 on 16 Jun 2004 - 09:29

Well, thanks for your comments. But, just to let everybody know on this forum that the Norton Antivirus 2004 and the Norton Firewall 2004 won't work anymore once you install the SP-2 (RC-2) on your system. I called Symantec to see if they had released a patch to correct this problem and a Symantec's technician told me that Win XP SP-2 is still in early stages and it's still BETA so, they were not going to release any patch to make NAV 2004 and FW 2004 work with SP-2 RC2 for now until SP-2 reaches the RTM stage. So, I have no choice to uninstalling it to make the firewall and the AV work again and hope for the best.

#25.6 Posted by djtaylor on 16 Jun 2004 - 10:33

I have Norton Internet Security 2004 Pro (NAV 2004 is integrated), and both work fine for me with RC2.

#25.7 Posted by SouL2kEEp on 16 Jun 2004 - 11:05

STANDALONE NORTON 2004 PRO worx like a charm in RC2

#25.8 Posted by McGazza on 16 Jun 2004 - 12:46

QUOTE

He uses NAV 2004.. do you know of a later version than that? Now who is too lazy to read?

No mate, he probably means the version number which isnt 2004 its the version number off the program itself. which us 10.0.1.13 If you have a version lower then that i dont think it will install properly.Anyway i have Norton Systemworks and that works well also

QUOTE

Well, thanks for your comments. But, just to let everybody know on this forum that the Norton Antivirus 2004 and the Norton Firewall 2004 won't work anymore once you install the SP-2 (RC-2) on your system. I called Symantec to see if they had released a patch to correct this problem and a Symantec's technician told me that Win XP SP-2 is still in early stages and it's still BETA so, they were not going to release any patch to make NAV 2004 and FW 2004 work with SP-2 RC2 for now until SP-2 reaches the RTM stage. So, I have no choice to uninstalling it to make the firewall and the AV work again and hope for the best.

No they work fine mate You need the latest version which i mentioned, i dont know whats wrong with your comp if it doesnt. That technician prob thought u were talking about the security centres intregation with the software!

Last edited by 55901 on 16 Jun 2004 - 12:51

#25.9 Posted by jessjc on 16 Jun 2004 - 14:09

Nortons Antivirus 2004 is working perfectly fine here too..

#25.10 Posted by McG on 16 Jun 2004 - 17:17

2004 works great here

#25.11 Posted by McGazza on 17 Jun 2004 - 00:48

Yeah thanks for the symantec technician story lol

(2 replies) #26 Posted by wd40 on 16 Jun 2004 - 04:31

so far so good with RC2... only problem is the Security Center doesn't detect I have Symantec NAV 9 installed. Anyone know how to fix it? Does it pick up the home edition?

#26.1 Posted by gawdflesh on 16 Jun 2004 - 04:42

Dunno, but it picks up and integrates with Kaspersky 5.x pretty nice. Even tells me if it's outdated or not.

#26.2 Posted by incubusdaemon on 16 Jun 2004 - 07:55

Symantec needs to add the API calls or call the API (I don't know which way it works), and then it will be intergrated. Look for a patch soon after SP2 is released (if symantec follows the old pattern)

#27 Posted by FISKER_Q on 16 Jun 2004 - 08:41

So anyone wanna know if it's possible to bypass check in the install if you got 2120?

(1 reply) #28 Posted by jessjc on 16 Jun 2004 - 09:25

Well... i have installed a fresh copy of XPSP2 RC2 Corporate..and all is good.
It seems to run smoother, faster, and more stable... Plus Divx is working again in this RC (installed klite codec pack fine), which it was not in other beta builds.
Nortons antivirus is detected in the security center, but is unable to monitor it.. i'm sure this will be fixed by either Microsoft or Symantec at a later date.
But besides that, I'm very happy with SP2.. looking forward to the final

#28.1 Posted by McG on 16 Jun 2004 - 17:18

nice

#29 Posted by DOGglee on 16 Jun 2004 - 09:30

nice

(9 replies) #30 Posted by Preemo on 16 Jun 2004 - 10:34

I tried installing this mofo but it stops like 10% in and says it cannot continue with the install and doesn't give much more explanation than that! What gives?!

#30.1 Posted by DOGglee on 16 Jun 2004 - 10:52

lol

#30.2 Posted by SouL2kEEp on 16 Jun 2004 - 11:09

http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/reporting/default.asp

#30.3 Posted by McGazza on 16 Jun 2004 - 12:53

lol

#30.4 Posted by Phil K on 16 Jun 2004 - 14:51

Does it with me too - and mine is a GENUINE copy. Came with the computer when I bought it.

It seems to be having a problem with atapi.sys

#30.5 Posted by gawdflesh on 16 Jun 2004 - 14:59

Disable Alcohol 120% or any other cdrom, burning apps, or virtual drives you may have running in the background as services and try again.

Also, most errors I had that were similar to the 10% - 1.6 meg download error were when I was doing some testing with keygenned keys on a Corp disc. Install ran fine and is working wonderfully on my legit copies of XP.

#30.6 Posted by Cøbra on 16 Jun 2004 - 15:22

Windows XP SP2 RC2 [ 263 MB ] Download Here

#30.7 Posted by [ timko ] on 16 Jun 2004 - 15:24

Thanks for the massive link

#30.8 Posted by nonick on 16 Jun 2004 - 20:37

DAMN! im downloading 5mbyte a sec from it ...... (EDU)

#30.9 Posted by djtaylor on 17 Jun 2004 - 07:56

Why post a download link when there's one at the top??

(4 replies) #31 Posted by Xeron on 16 Jun 2004 - 11:14

I'm sure that my memory usage is lower than it was before I installed it and things do seem to be quicker. I wonder whether there were any speed or memory enhancements made.

#31.1 Posted by SouL2kEEp on 16 Jun 2004 - 11:21

nah.. Micro would have said so if they did..

#31.2 Posted by McGazza on 16 Jun 2004 - 12:54

i think RC2 was more on stability and bug fixes which may make it seem as if its running faster.

#31.3 Posted by McG on 16 Jun 2004 - 17:19

yeah MS would boast about it if they did

#31.4 Posted by McGazza on 17 Jun 2004 - 00:50

Would they? they never boasted about the previous builds brought into testing too much did they

(1 reply) #32 Posted by bush on 16 Jun 2004 - 14:26

i read somewhere, they have integrated bad serials in this build

#32.1 Posted by McG on 16 Jun 2004 - 17:19

they sort of did--but apparently the 640 something works? thats what i read in this thread

(1 reply) #33 Posted by aaron901 on 16 Jun 2004 - 14:35

when will the final come out?!?

#33.1 Posted by [ timko ] on 16 Jun 2004 - 15:25

I'd say give it another month, *minimum* but most likely longer

(6 replies)