Windows XP SP2 Delayed Until Late 2004

View Poll Results: Which method do you prefer?

Voters
8. You may not vote on this poll
  • Decimal Method (No Binary)

    4 50.00%
  • Binary Method

    4 50.00%
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Windows XP SP2 Delayed Until Late 2004

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    472

    Windows XP SP2 Delayed Until Late 2004

    complete story here: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1222635,00.asp

    Microsoft has pushed back the release date for the second Windows XP service pack to the third quarter of 2004. SP2 was long expected to debut before the end of 2003
    The possible implications of the move are far reaching. A yearlong delay gives Microsoft significant time to further its integration strategy with Windows XP building more components directly into the operating system.

    "It's possible that Microsoft is preparing a more substantive-than-usual service pack that would add new features to Windows XP or hybrids Media Center and Tablet PC," said Wilcox.

    One such potential feature is Microsoft's PC Satisfaction package, currently in beta testing. PC Satisfaction extends the native functionality of Windows XP with services such as an enhanced firewall and virus scanner that give customers a better Windows experience out of the box.

    Although Microsoft has not yet announced how it plans to issue PC Satisfaction in its final form, the company hinted that a new firewall would be enabled by default in the next Windows XP update.
    guru@linux:~> who I grep -i blonde I talk; cd ~; wine; talk; touch; unzip; touch; strip; gasp; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; gasp; umount; make clean; sleep;

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    207
    hell... i support the push-back... as long as the extra time taken is put to good use in actually making the OS safer than it was originally intended to be.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    472
    buying technology from romanian company i really doubt if M$ is planning to push AV in SP2 for XP...but i do expect M$ AV in WIndows LongHorn.......
    guru@linux:~> who I grep -i blonde I talk; cd ~; wine; talk; touch; unzip; touch; strip; gasp; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; gasp; umount; make clean; sleep;

  4. #4
    Master-Jedi-Pimps0r & Moderator thehorse13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Washington D.C. area
    Posts
    2,884
    The question then becomes when AV finally *does* have the MS brand name on it, will you be able to remove it from the OS or will it be "melded" with many other components of the OS?

    Time will tell but something tells me that Uncle Billy didn't just buy a Romanian AV company because he is a nice guy. I see MS going for broke in the AV arena as part of their overall security initiative.



    --TH13
    Our scars have the power to remind us that our past was real. -- Hannibal Lecter.
    Talent is God given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful. -- John Wooden

  5. #5
    The Iceman Cometh
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,209
    hell... i support the push-back... as long as the extra time taken is put to good use in actually making the OS safer than it was originally intended to be.
    I agree with this. The only question I have is, will they be nice enough to release a post-SP1 hotfix roll-up? I was reading another forum about this same subjet where someone said, after a clean install of XP with SP1, they had 32 MB of updates to install. If we have to wait another year, for the next service pack, how large is the download going to be after a fresh install? 50 MB? 60 MB? More? Microsoft released such a roll-up for NT, so hopefully they'll do the same for XP so administrators and consumers can download one file instead of 50+ little updates.

    AJ

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    634
    A MS antivirus. I don't even want to imagine. They are already not able to patch correctly their OSs, browsers and mailers (or when they patch them, they don't work correctly!).

    THat's why I only have a funny question about this possibility. Will M$ antivirus be honest and admit that Windows is a virus, then uninstalling it?
    Life is boring. Play NetHack... --more--

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    21
    Maybe MSBlaster will contribute to making MS think more about security, lets face it they needed a good scare to be arsed to do anything about their ropey attitude to security. Personally I am interested to see if they concentrate more on this aspect due to the virus.

  8. #8
    Senior Member RoadClosed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,834
    Microsoft Anti-virus and Fire walling technology is certainly welcome. I for one will always look for a 3rd party to utilize security. How can you monitor and protect an OS when you (the program) are part of that OS and potentially all vulnerabilities associated with it?

    MSBlaster could be the very thing (straw breaking camel's back) that is forcing a serious delay in the service pack.
    West of House
    You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
    There is a small mailbox here.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •