MS continues the Update-Mania

Hihi,

just went online, and what did i have to see? A little yellow item next to the system-tray clock…
Getting a 2.9 MB security-update for IE with WinXP SP2…

hmmmm, how long is the “it’s sooo safe” SP2 out now?!? … :wink:

:Z

Raz

only one of them is for systems with sp2?

yes, as i saw the other securitiy updates released are for WinXP w/ SP1 (officially) but they are also d-loaded by a SP2 system… that’s strange, why does WinUpdate d-load those if they were not needed… :wink:

well, what exactly THIS above mentioned update does is:
it made (even) me install FIREFOX… :wink: i give it a chance to convince me of it’s quality… :wink:

Well, consider the ratio of Windows:Linux: others users and think about whats most vulnerable and sought after for comprimise.

People always complain that Windows and all of its components such as IE and other’s have security holes and security risks… well imagine if LINUX were top dog now, maybe if millions used it everyday like Windows is used now, more and more gaps would open up there, same goes for other browsers.

This is why I always play it safe and wait at least 6mo after a SP comes out, I am still on SP1a and SP2 has nothing to offer that I need as of now anyway. I think after SP2 was released, 1 week later MS found a huge security hole, so this discovery you made is of no surprise.

I just wish MS sold Windows with slipstreamed SP and rollout updates available, this way you get a nice original instead of a copy. And it saves you the work to do it yourself of course.

I decided also to wait with the installation of SP2. Spent some hours to make it out in details what was it offering compared to SP1. When learned, looked for feedbacks. Well, lot of problems, plus Internet security is not the topic that makes me excited in an update/upgrade (whatever). For that purpose there are many solutions that I prefer from my personal experience. Shrugs.

@xtacydima:
that’s what i always say if ppl say that windows is sooo unsafe…
it’s always only a question of what is on top at the moment… so the “hackers” concentrate on that, of course…

Im using SP2 now since it came out. I installed it on one of my machines to test it. The Test System was WinXP SP1a with all actual Updates till SP2 and was used heavily for installing, testing and uninstalling Apps and Drivers.
In my opinion SP2 should only be installed on a complete new Installation of WinXP SP1a to get the most stability in it. My System has Performance Problems since this SP2 installation. On another Machine with the same Hardware i tested it with a complete Reinstall and the Systems runs much better. Even after installing all Applications and DRivers that are on the 1st System.
Nevertheless SP2 seems to be a good step into the right direction.

I think Linux will get the same “problems” in near future because its rapid growing Community.

Regards
Muellinger_hn

Actually… you should be glad that stuff like this is released. Imagine MS would wait for half a year (oh wait a moment, that’s reality) or so; duting that time your system would be utterly vurnerable. I know it feels like a pain in the @$$ to update every few days, but as long as it’s neccesary, it’s a good and important thing to do.

About the Linux story: yes, if Linux was more popular amongst home users, more security holes would be discovered and the system would be more vurnerable. On the other hand, the Linux 2.6 kernel is safer than the Windows XP kernel is. Why that is? Because of the very very basic fundings the system is built on. I guess I could write a nice article on this, but as I don’t have the time you’ll just have to take my word for it. It’s often the additional software that makes the system unsafe, not the kernel itsself btw.

why does everybody bith about MS, you complain that there are bugs, then you complain that there are to many patches, if you had 100% controll over MS how would you run it better?

ben :slight_smile:

that’s not what i mean… i wanted to say: hey, it’s not bad that MS releases this patches, but i think it’s kind of funny that a month after releasing this long promised “big” security update SP2 the patching goes on as before…
they might have done it better, if they re-newed some parts of windows instead of trying to fix existing problems…

so, i still say: “I LIKE MICROSOFT SOFTWARE!!!” And i mean it as i say it!
I also like the early security updates, which prevented me from things like sasser, myDoom or whatever…

But nevertheless, IF there is a better software which is not from MS (of course, i’d like to see better MS software, like a new IE with a complete new code which is not so much buggy for hackers) i’d i prefer using it…

hope, it’s clearer now, at the main topic i was just wondering how long the in the public promised safeness of SP2 did hold… :wink:

Raz

I am always amused by people, and this does not just apply to MS products, that like to bitch and complain, and ramble on and on, and even post here periodically about repeptative problems, late patches, security risks, buggy software, freezing up, bla bla bla… etc… YET, they still use the product. That gets me the most. If you hate it that much why are you still using it??? Obviously… alternatives exist, its amazing really. I see this most with Windows of course, but c’mon, if you hate it that much use something else, or at least don’t repetitavely compalin over and over again about it.

What I find is a problem is that for many programs that there are no equivalent alternatives. Yes, browsing the internet and typing letters can be done on a zillion of different platforms, but when it comes to more specicific (and often, more professional) tasks, there’s only Windows software avaiable.
And don’t forget about the people that have to work on a certain platform because their companies tells them to.

It’s not that easy me thinks.

@Razor: I get your point. What can I say? I guess that the MS marketing department did a good job on indoctrinating ppl telling what a great step forward SP2 would be (it is a move in the good direction in some points I think).

@xtacydima:
if you ment me with your post, i say it again:

i don’t hate it, as you called it, and i use much MS software (WinXP which i really like, Office 2k3, which i like, too…)

AND:

I didn’t mean you Razor, I meant lots of other people I meet in my field and from reading several forums and threads around. I basically meant lots of people by it :wink:

@De-ehn
Yea I agree, although Linux is comming along well with a nice few choices of internet browser, mp3 software, burning software, dvd playback software, and star office is more than sufficient for the avg user. It may not be enough for a cdfreak user but its not a bad progression, who knows… maybe one day LINUX will prevail and tie MS!!!

I didn’t mean you Razor

ok… :wink:

sadly, if you want the security holes to be gone (or at least partly removed), windows will have to be redesigned from nearly the ground up. IE is too integrated for security’s sake.

Any system connected to the internet is vulnerable … there is no safe OS.

It’s not only MS that is being attacked and targeted but also many unix servers.The first attacks on the internet (worms,denial of sevice attacks etc.) were against unix systems.

Linux and other UNIX-like systems are open source , so it’s easier to create patches and updates for them.

i would disable the auto update, i sure hate anyone having control over my PC

Windows is the only real option, everything is built for it, and IF a mac verison/equilivent comes out it will cost twice as much.

ben :slight_smile:

remember you said that :smiley: