Update for Windows XP Service Pack 2 (KB885222)
Posted by Daniel Fleshbourne on 17 December 2004 - 19:48 · 64 comments & 49933 views
About the Author
Full name: Daniel Fleshbourne
Forum name: Daniel
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Daniel Fleshbourne
Forum name: Daniel
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
#1 Posted by wiReZ on 17 Dec 2004 - 19:56
- Wow, they finally fixed this. Damn SP2.
-
#2 Posted by gadean on 17 Dec 2004 - 20:01
- they should have released this update with the other updates a few days ago. Bah! This is so annoying to system admins.
-
#3 Posted by icecaveman on 17 Dec 2004 - 20:06
- gadean how is this problem relative to system admins? It's a patch I can't see many corporations running Windows would need...
-
(2 replies)
#4 Posted by NeoSigma on 17 Dec 2004 - 20:11
- My firewire device (Sony MiniDV camcorder) connects then disconnects on its own in SP2. Worked great in SP1. I thought this update would help but it didn't.
-
#4.1 Posted by DinaMoe on 17 Dec 2004 - 20:28
- Yeah, I connect my 1st G iPod to firewire and it too disconnects and reconnects on it's own. And you say you're still having this problem?
-
#4.2 Posted by bangbang023 on 17 Dec 2004 - 21:56
- I had that issue with USB in early sp2 testing. I had to uninstall and reinstall the service pack to fix it
-
(2 replies)
#5 Posted by [DGS] on 17 Dec 2004 - 20:26
- Nothing on windowsupdate.com...
-
(6 replies)
#6 Posted by Hafnium on 17 Dec 2004 - 20:33
- I get this error message, when trying to install the update:
"Cannot create a file when that file already exists".
What could that be?!
/Hafnium -
#6.2 Posted by cooldude7273 on 18 Dec 2004 - 03:41
- I am getting the same message!
-
#6.3 Posted by Leolo on 19 Dec 2004 - 18:47
- I was getting also the same message. In my case the problem was caused because I had swapped the FireWire controller to another PCI slot.
I solved it by doing the following:
- Go to the device manager and get the properties of your firewire controller located inside the "IEEE 1394 Bus Host Controllers" category. In the first tab called General there is an entry called Location. Write down in a paper the info inside brackets (PCI bus x, device x, function x). Also go to the Details tab and write down the Device Instance Id info.
- Go to the following registry key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-SYSTEM-CurrentControlSet-Enum-PCI
- You'll see that there are probably two or more 1394_instance_id keys inside the 1394_hc_hw_id key. Find the one that points to the current location of your controller by looking at the LocationInformation value. You can verify that you have found the correct key by comparing the Device Instance Id that you wrote down in the paper and checking that it does correspond to the 1394_hc_hw_id key that you see in the registry.
- Delete all the 1394_instance_id subkeys EXCEPT THE ONE THAT POINTS TO THE CURRENT LOCATION OF YOUR CONTROLLER
- REMEMBER TO NOT DELETE ANY KEY THAT STARTS WITH "VEN_".
- YOU ONLY HAVE TO DELETE THE SUBKEYS THAT ARE HANGING FROM THE 1394_hc_hw_id KEY AND ARE NOT POINTING TO THE CURRENT LOCATION OF YOUR CONTROLLER!!
- Please don't delete anything if you're not absolutely sure of what you're doing.
After that you should be able to install the KB885222 update.
Last edited by 86592 on 19 Dec 2004 - 19:12 -
#6.4 Posted by Hafnium on 19 Dec 2004 - 23:41
- Leolo,
Thanks a lot for your comprehensive suggestions!
Sadly, I was not able to find any 1394_hc_hw_id key inside .../Enum/PCI. I only see "VEN_" keys.
I've two 1394 controllers in my PC - one inherent to my ASUS K8N-E DLX nForce3 MB (VIA chip) and one Adaptec FireConnect 8300 1394b PCI controller (Texas Ins. chip). Interestingly, I too have been swapping the PCI controller between PCI slots following a clean Windows XP installation.
Here's a screen dump of my Regedit-efforts. The two open "VEN_"-keys are the ones, which I identified as being associated to my 1394 controllers.
Any further suggestions is highly appreciated!
/Hafnium
Last edited by 55483 on 20 Dec 2004 - 00:03 -
#6.5 Posted by Leolo on 20 Dec 2004 - 00:30
- Sorry, I didn't make clear that 1394_hc_hw_id and 1394_instance_id are simply aliases. The real names of those keys are different in each computer.
Judging from the screenshot, the 1394_hc_hw_id key that we are looking for in your computer is called VEN_104C&DEV_8025&SUBSYS_00359005&REV_01
According to http://www.pcidatabase.com/:
VEN_1022 corresponds to the VENDOR 1022 (AMD or SmartLink?)
VEN_10DE corresponds to the VENDOR 10DE (NVIDIA Corporation)
VEN_104C corresponds to the VENDOR 104C (Texas Instruments, the card which you swapped)
VEN_1106 corresponds to the VENDOR 1106 (Via Technologies, the integrated controller)
VEN_9005 corresponds to the VENDOR 9005 (Adaptec)
Every time that you swap the firewire controller to another PCI slot, a new 1394_instance_id subkey is created inside the 1394_hc_hw_id key. Unfortunately, Windows doesn't clean up the old subkey and that's the origin of your problem.
Only one of the two subkeys that hang from the VEN_104C... key is correct. You must find which one is correctly pointing to the current location of your controller by looking at the LocationInformation value and comparing it with the correct value that you wrote down in the paper at the beginning.
The subkey with the wrong LocationInformation value has to be deleted in order to install the KB885222 patch. Remember that you'll have to change the permissions of the subkey and give yourself total control privileges of the subkey in order to delete it.
Regards.
Last edited by 86592 on 20 Dec 2004 - 00:42
-
(10 replies)
#7 Posted by denzilla on 17 Dec 2004 - 20:57
- I will quote something I posted on msfn.org:
" I've got a legit copy of XP Pro, but I gotta say I'm getting sick of this Microsoft Genuine Advantage crap. I know you don't have to validate, but its gonna end up manditory and one more thing the legit public will have to deal with. Microsoft, YOU WILL NEVER STOP PEOPLE FROM CRACKING, AND COPYING YOUR STUFF!!! QUIT MAKING PAYING CUSTOMERS SUFFER WITH THIS GARBAGE!!!!!!! Intead of spending millions of dollars on a futile effort, why not actually try to add features and improve the products to justify the rediculous amount of money you charge for them!? Heres another shocker....maybe lower the cost so more people will buy it instead of copy it? " -
#7.3 Posted by groingo2 on 17 Dec 2004 - 21:47
- This is a first, now they want my 25 character product code, entered it and they say invalid...they can kiss my A--!
-
#7.4 Posted by theyarecomingforyou on 18 Dec 2004 - 02:07
- If they are going to do this then they should at least do it properly - I find it amusing that people with the keygen can authorise without problems.
-
#7.5 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 18 Dec 2004 - 04:46
- It is amusing that we can authorise without problems.
-
#7.6 Posted by rrezende on 18 Dec 2004 - 18:49
- I find it an absurd that they start this check in the US. There are a lot more markets in the world that use pirated copies of Windows. Why do they start on the one where most users have really bought the product?
I downloaded this latest updated withou any questions asked. Brazilian Portuguese version here. -
#7.7 Posted by Sn1p3t on 19 Dec 2004 - 03:21
- That quote is pretty stupid.
A company is simply giving you benefits for owning a free copy of their software. In fact, they opened up SP2 for illigal versions of XP.
They give you some pretty good software as long as you have a legit copy. Why are you whining? -
#7.8 Posted by denzilla on 19 Dec 2004 - 11:02
- The free software is just a trojan horse for more Bullsh*t to come from MS. If you're too blind to see that, take your melon out from the inside of Bill Gate's rear!
-
#7.9 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 19 Dec 2004 - 11:39
- Yes, and they control the entire world in an underground government, they make you their slaves through the flu shots.
You know what I mean. Does MS really ever do anything out of the kindness of their hearts?-
(3 replies)
#8 Posted by NYCBetaSte on 17 Dec 2004 - 21:41
- on behalf of number 7 can someone upload the update i tried to get it from windows.crap but couldnt, im sure its small and im sure someone can upload it, and if im lucky maybe someone can upload all the after sp2 updates in one install file?
-
#8.1 Posted by [DGS] on 18 Dec 2004 - 08:05
- http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/6/c/b6c7c838-4056-4137-a4cb-2157e3811b9b/WindowsXP-KB885222-x86-ENU.exe
-
#8.2 Posted by [DGS] on 18 Dec 2004 - 08:06
- http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/6/c/b6c7c838-4056-4137-a4cb-2157e3811b9b/WindowsXP-KB885222-x86-ENU.exe
-
(1 reply)
#9 Posted by MikeD on 17 Dec 2004 - 21:55
- if you hit no a bunch of times it will allow yout to download it.
-
#10 Posted by Xylene on 17 Dec 2004 - 22:17
- ROFL, they fix stupid **** like this, but security holes can go unpatched for months.
-
#11 Posted by Chicane-UK on 18 Dec 2004 - 00:08
- Well validated ok and installed ok.. next time I reboot, i'll see if I get all that crap with my iPod just not letting me undock it after having it plugged in for a few hours.
Either that or i'll just reformat and go back to SP1...
-
(1 reply)
#12 Posted by soldier1st on 18 Dec 2004 - 00:49
- well said my friend well said indeed
there are many reasons and advantages to sticking to sp1
-
(9 replies)
#13 Posted by shichiroji4 on 18 Dec 2004 - 02:00
- As expected, M$ screws it all up by creating more problems from the supposed solution. What a joke!
Mac's still the best out there. -
#13.1 Posted by ThaCrip on 18 Dec 2004 - 03:21
- im kinda 50/50 with the microsoft thing... Windows may have alot os security issues on it but the fact remains is it's still pretty much the best OS out there in terms of it's EASY to use and WORKS (well most of the time)
i wish OS's like linux would become easier to use... i would like to mess with linux more... ill have to setup my old ass 475mhz amd k6-2 pc on it sometime. -
#13.2 Posted by markjensen on 18 Dec 2004 - 05:57
- There are forums here on Neowin to discuss Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux vs. CPM or whatever. Please use those places to bring up discussions along those lines.
Yes, it seems that Microsoft has addressed a large number of issues, and has introduced a few new problems. However, the positive changes likely outweigh the negative ones for perhaps 99% of users. Other OSes have had the similar things happen where a repair to some section of code causes problems for a subset of users in another part of the system. -
#13.3 Posted by shichiroji4 on 18 Dec 2004 - 07:11
QUOTE However, the positive changes likely outweigh the negative ones for perhaps 99% of users.
Yea rite. If it's really positive for 99% users like you say, security companies like Symantec and Mcaffee would have gone bust long time ago. The entire NT architecutre is unsound. No amount of patching will make is as secure as OSX. Go get a Mac instead of making groundless M$ excuses and you'll see
XP doesn't come close to OSX. That's a fact you M$ fanboys refuse to admit.-
#13.4 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 18 Dec 2004 - 09:04
- Another brilliant trolling post from you, schichiroji, bravo.
-
#13.5 Posted by YKW on 18 Dec 2004 - 11:16
QUOTE XP doesn't come close to OSX. That's a fact you M$ fanboys refuse to admit.
This is so unfair! Why only MS gets to use currency signs in their trademarks? I demand we start calling OS X O$ X and Linux £inux!-
#13.6 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 18 Dec 2004 - 11:54
- Non' Non' You've tarnished the magnificant trolling post, it is perfect the way it is with its brilliant mix of ignorance and noobishness.
-
#13.7 Posted by markjensen on 18 Dec 2004 - 14:15
QUOTE XP doesn't come close to OSX. That's a fact you M$ fanboys refuse to admit.
For default settings on install you are 100% correct. However, any OS can be made very secure by following proper administration rules (user priveleges, strong passwords and close unneeded ports).
Finally, it is ironic that I am being called a Microsoft fanboy, as I am a 100% Linux user at home (I can't control my OS at work, however). Maybe it is just because I am being reasonable about Operating Systems that I am viewed as "the enemy" to you?-
#13.8 Posted by brianshapiro on 18 Dec 2004 - 21:42
- Ma¢intosh
-
(1 reply)
#14 Posted by QuasaR on 18 Dec 2004 - 06:10
- Has anyone fixed the "Cannot create a file when that file already exists" problem? I have no idea how to get around this. :/
edit: when you goto the download page (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=5c076e4c-aec8-434d-9849-e668a50e6e81&displaylang=en) and it asks you to validate your copy of WinXP, click continue, then select "No, do not validate Windows at this time, but take me to the download." then Continue. and volla you can now download the update -
#14.1 Posted by Leolo on 19 Dec 2004 - 18:52
- Check this link and tell me if it solves your problem:
http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?categor...8#comment318637
-
#15 Posted by EduardValencia on 18 Dec 2004 - 08:00
- update installed
-
(1 reply)
#16 Posted by [DGS] on 18 Dec 2004 - 08:05
- http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/6/c/b6c7c838-4056-4137-a4cb-2157e3811b9b/WindowsXP-KB885222-x86-ENU.exe
-
#16.1 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 18 Dec 2004 - 11:55
- That's the third time you've posted that here, and you do realize that authentification isn't mandatory, right?
-
(5 replies)
#17 Posted by bilston on 18 Dec 2004 - 17:20
- Doesnt install for me says cannot create file when it already exists, prolly already got it or something.
-
#17.2 Posted by justfornow on 18 Dec 2004 - 22:08
- Does the install stall looking for a file called "branches.inf"?
-
#17.3 Posted by Hafnium on 19 Dec 2004 - 14:16
- No...
For me it just stops with the error message:
"Cannot create file when that file already exists".
/Hafnium -
#17.4 Posted by Leolo on 19 Dec 2004 - 18:52
- Please, try this method and tell me if it solves your problem:
http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?categor...8#comment318637
-
#18 Posted by altezza on 18 Dec 2004 - 22:53
- Thanks for the updates.
-
(1 reply)
#19 Posted by andy2004 on 18 Dec 2004 - 23:15
-
#19.1 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 19 Dec 2004 - 03:56
-
-
#20 Posted by NickHope on 20 Dec 2004 - 17:15
- I took a read of the support article concerning this update at at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/885222
The speed of the host controller appears to be governed by a new DWord called Sidspeed. And I quote...
DWord value 0 = S100 speed
DWord value 1 = S200 speed
DWord value 2 = S300 speed (default value)
DWord value 3 = S400/S800 speed (Windows XP Service Pack 1 [SP1] value)
I was a bit concerned to see that the default value is S300 (DWord value 2). Surely IEEE 1394 cards are mostly faster than this, aren't they, and we should be changing this DWord to the value 3 (S400/S800)? And how would I find out what speed my IEEE 1394 cards are anyway?
-
#21 Posted by NickHope on 29 Dec 2004 - 19:26
- I answered my own question. I applied this patch to both my desktop PC and laptop and left the Sidspeed value at 2. Things seemed to be OK.
I basically forgot about the patch and spent most of today trying to work out why my DV video captures were inconsistent and corrupt. I blamed the cameras, the tapes, the firewire card, the cables, the hard drive, spyware etc etc.. I was gutted because this was footage of the tsunami clean-up. I then tried the laptop and the capture was OK, ruling out the cameras and the tape.
Then the Sidspeed thing suddenly hit me. I upped it from 2 to 3 on my desktop PC, rebooted and suddenly everthing is fine again. The laptop must just have a faster throughput or something, but I've changed it to 3 on that too, just to make sure.
So... if you apply this patch and your captures are flaky, increase the value of Sidspeed!
-
#22 Posted by rustet on 28 Jan 2008 - 15:52
- Hey, just wanted to post another way to fix this "Cannot create a file when that file already exists" problem:
Deleting the registry key didn't work out for me, all I got was partial deletion of the subkey, and error messages when I tried to merge the backed up registry files, saying the keys were in use by another process.
After much frustration and try and fail (with an emphasis on fail), I simply entered the device manager and uninstalled my FireWire card (texas instruments) from there, plugged it back in (it's an expresscard), reinstalled and ran the update. It worked like a charm, and felt a bit safer than messing with the registry.
Last edited by rustet on 28 Jan 2008 - 20:16
After you install Windows XP Service Pack 2, some 1394 devices (such as digital cameras that use S400 speed) may not perform as expected. Install this update to help prevent this issue. After you install this update, you will have to restart your computer.
What's new in 1.1:
What's being said about gdSuite
“[gdSuite] bring[s] Google closer to creating an interface that Microsoft is likely to deliver.” - NewsFactor
“gdSuite … gives Google Desktop Search an interface, and some much needed advanced features” - InsideGoogle
“I'm glad to have the additional options for those times when Google Desktop doesn't find exactly what I needed quickly” - SearchEngineWatch, on gdSuite