Neowin.net

You only need expensive computer parts for high-end gaming and high-end work (3DSM, Maya, etc...). Vista RC2 can run on my 1.8Ghz AMD Duron PC with Radeon 9700 GFX. Hardly high-end, and thats with 512MB ram to.

so from not getting SP3 - what is the thing you will miss?

... security updates will still be issued I believe, just no major update to the OS.

that's a big mistake, they shouldn't forget about people using their older OS. They were still releasing service packs for Win2k after XP was released.....

I see/hear that a lot, but mostly it is people venting - few people actually act on it.

But if you do, the *nix forums here are pretty helpful.

really? i'll have to check it out then. I have linux on an extra harddrive i fart around with to try to learn linux, like the basic simple commands and command line functions etc. just like when i was new to windows. i've alwasy been looking for something akin to a linux for dummies guide to help me out as i try to become a linux guru.

haha, good luck with that

If leesmithg plays games that aren't tied solely to Windows then *nix would be a good choice. If you don't tie yourself down to Windows apps then you don't need to be tied to Windows.

There's no reason to run off to linux just because we "might" not get SP3 for XP. There has been nothing official from MS at this point, and we're only going off of what Paul thinks at this point from the delays it's had.

Even if we don't get an SP3, we'll get a Security Rollup insted, which is just what a SP is mostly minus any non-security updates they might have done. Win2k got one in 2004? Regradless, SRs are just just like SPs. XP isn't going to be getting any new features like it did with SP2, so it's not like we're missing out. If you stay up to date with updates to this point you don't lose anything. And the rollup can also be slipstreamed into your disc just like a SP can.

Windows XP SP3 (or XP +) is already out. It's called Windows Vista Basic...aka Vista Cripplewared for Retards.

I personally don't think it needs one.

Exactly.

I agree; MS has basically already released their SP3 by now, just in individual files.

There are huge amounts of patches released since SP2, and by the time their XP support runs out, there should definitely be an "SP3" in terms of fixes. All that's missing is the packaging.

Bull...

I did a fresh install of XP w/ SP2 today, and Windows Update had a grand total of 71 patches for me. That's getting a bit excessive, don't you think?

Well, if they think this news is going to create a stampede toward Vista, they are sadly mistaken.

This isn't any "news" from MS. Just more of what paul thinks/feels is going on. No official word about SP3 has been said, and just like MS doesn't talk about Vista SP1, they're not talking about XP SP3. Again, if we don't get a Service Pack, we'll get a Security Rollup, or Patch Rollup etc. This can also be slipstreamed to your XP install just like a service pack can. Nothing different at all, except the name. We're not expecting/getting any new features for XP anyways. This also lessens the need for a service pack a bit more.

Sorry but the true hurt

It's funny how they try to keep their customers. Don't give support, and then assume they'll go to Vista instead.

It only works because they're dominating the market.

Jugalator you always attacked me before when i protested against microsoft. congrates

or am i mistaking yopu for another person?

Exactly

sp3 . . not a huge deal to me, my xp pro sp2 installs are running just fine as is, what can a new service pack bring to the table?, the OS is stable, and performance is great.

Xp is great right now until I eventually transition everything over to vista (mature drivers and probably until SP1, yes this OS needs to get a service pack for bug fixes/performance/security issues, while xp is pretty complete as is) Plus right now, I haven't bought new hardware yet (dx10) , and there aren't any must have vista only games/apps to make me switch just yet

Improve the new OS, transition away from xp . . sounds about right to me

Yeah i agree with that, no real need for a full blown SP3 as it works well at the moment and there will still be security updates. They should concentrate there efforts on vista and perfecting it, aslets face it sooner or later most of us are going to have to move over to it.

True, and that page was updated recently: Last Updated: March 28, 2007.

So.. wait... I understand 2008, but what does the rest mean in 1H CY2008?

1st Half, Calendar Year 2008

Owned

Because we paid the same amount of money for XP as we do for Vista so we expect support, not to be dropped on a new product cycle. Service Packs clean-up the amount of installation overlap and registry mess created by installing the dozens if not hundreds of patches provided through Windows Update. A single Service Pack makes management of base installations much simpler.

They should can Vista entirely.

I dispise Vista as it is. You can read all over the place here about that. Vista doesn't need to die. It needs a SP or two. It could be a great OS if they [MS] take the time to make it that way. In any case, unless most of the memory caching bugs have been fixed, I'll be waiting for W7.

[quote=MrCobra said,#9.3
.... I'll be waiting for W7.[/quote]

When "W7" comes out you will still complain about it

Yes, coz the 5 years they spent to develop it wasn't long enough

I would agree, but since I've moved on to using 2003 as a workstation, it just isn't that important to me.

try AutoPatcher

Being funny? No
Being stupid? Yes

Yeah, that Windows 98 was such a failure.

Oh come on. You have got constant updates for over six years. You didn't have buy a new OS every two years.

don't be a Microsoft sycophant.

That word doesn't apply, since what he said is 100% accurate and verifiable.

that word very much applies due to his close minded suck up to microsoft and is 100% accurate and verifiable.

blablabla
So much stupidity, lol

And let me guess, you are an Apple fanboy.

i think it atleast needs a sp3 for a tie up all patches and to prove that microsoft is a honest company.

You can tie up all patches since SP2 with a security rollup like they did with Win2k. I'm pretty sure you can slipstream SRs just like you can SPs to your XP installs. IF they don't SP3 for a SR1 it makes little or no difference. Only in the name of what you'll have to download.

And again, MS hasn't said anything official about SP3 for XP. You're going off of Pauls rants, unless MS says "We're not doing SP3 for XP.", I'll hold off on bitching just yet.

that just it microsoft doesnt and wont say. there was a promise for a sp3 in spring this year if i remember.

This is true. At work we use one of these hotfixes to solve a problem and it'd be better if we could get an SP3 with all these merged in

if there is not a service pack this year it will hurt Microsoft in the reliability/dependability department. this will not go unpunished.

Really? Will it? And who are you? The punisher? Come on now. I plan to stick with XP too, but I could give a care less WHAT they release for it. If you know what you're doing, your computer should be relatively stable, and if you're not an idiot, you really don't have much to fear.

I really don't see what you would lose in reliability from not having SP3. I mean, XP SP2 is a very stable OS, and really, there's very little that Microsoft should feel obliged to do to it apart from continuing to release new hotfixes etc. What would definitely be nice is a SR. Which they might as well call SP3 if it stops people like you from whining.

reliability dependability aspects im talking about is microsoft's credibilty

SP2B is just SP2 plus the IE6 ActiveX changes mandated by the Eolas lawsuit. They did the same thing for SP1 when they released SP1a which removed the MSJVM.

good job now go collect your pay from bill.

That's like saying, "Let's do a class-action lawsuit for not releasing a service pack for Windows 3.x in 1998".

Yes, they reduced their number of operating systems down to one. But the true 32-bit operating systems have always had more than a three-year life-span, and NT5.1 has had six.

MS extended support for the hybrid 9x systems at least once...well beyond the projected life-span of those operating systems. MS has not abandoned XP, and will continue to support XP (and NT5) with updates over the next couple of years. It just won't be as service packs...as far as we know (those analysts have been proven wrong a few times before, ya know)

I'll give you the Xbox but not with there PC products. If anything, the level of support MS puts into Windows and other software they make is what's holding it back and causing problems.

The sheer level of support for backwords compatibility with hardware and software on Windows is mind blowing. The legecy support is what's giving people problems in the first place, be it with security, or stability. People bitch when something doesn't work, but also bitch about how bloated Windows is and that they need to get rid of all the legecy code. You can't have it both ways you know.

When SP2 came out, they cut down on the "support" for older things a bit, and broke some apps, and everyone here + their grandmom bitched and moaned about it. Now we get some speculation about SP3 from Paul, no official word on it from MS, and people yet again bitch and moan. XP's normal support will last until 2009, and iirc extended support until 2012? That's MORE then enough support for an OS many of you probably didn't even buy in the first place.

The bottom line is this. If we don't get an SP3, we'll get an SR1, only difference between the two is that SRs only have security updates while SPs have all the optional downloads many of you don't even get off of Windows Update. And maybe a few tweaks to the UI and other minor fixes. SP2 for XP was a "special" case, MS has said this lots of times. You will not get another big SP like it in the future, no grande new features will be pushed out with SPs and so on. Until MS says something about not doing SP3 officially, I will take what Paul wrote as him ranting yet again. Until then, we'll just wait for 2008 (which was the plan anyways), to see if we get SP3 or not.

Well...look here, someone who doesn't have their head up their ass.

This is not news, Microsoft has never said any such thing and SP3 is still on the schedule. Just Paul Thurrot spreading FUD.

I knew there had to be some witchcraft involved with Windows.