XP SP3, Is it really necessary?

Alright, I've put XP Pro SP2 edition onto my laptop computer, It resolved some issues i was having with my SSD, and has sped up the whole pc a great deal.

I have installed every patch so far, appart from SP3, is it really that necessary of an update? and if i choose not to install it, will i continue to get updates from microsoft. or will they stop untill i install SP3?


Note: when i say issues with SSD i meant under vista, for some reason it was getting 0.3 second access times instead of 0.1 - and the harddrive space was been reported as 21 GB instead of 80.

You can see what im on about here http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=138761&page=36 at post 352

 

You kind of answered your post. Updates included in SP3 will not be distributed separately. You will get the usual malware removal things and pointless certificates. I you want more extensive updates, go on SP3.

 

Oh right :/ thats a shame then, ive only ever had annoyances with SP3, like intermittantly when you press the start button the start menu takes longer to load than normal and stuff like that :/

 

They also implemented stuff rendering some software incompatible. Vista approach. Like my Audigy Platinum. I have to install that on Sp2 maximum otherwise it my EQ and mixer will give out of memory errors. I update to Sp3 afterwards.

 

That's an issue with the software being written poorly, not with SP3.
There is no reason not to install SP3. It has shown to increase performance back to the SP1 level (SP2 decreased performance by approximately 10%), and more importantly, it gives you all the security updates you need. SP3 is NOT a major system overhaul the way SP2 was. SP3 is an update rollup.

 

XP was already a very mature and developed OS for several years without SP3; if you look at the release notes for the new service pack, you'll see that none of the features are really needed.

 

SP3 is useful for reinstalling XP so that you get all of the updates in one neat package rather than having to download a ton of updates.

 

A downside of SP3 is it forces you to upgrade to IE7 and WMP 11. There are a couple of things WMP 10 is better at...

 

Not true. It does not install either, and you can keep right on using either IE6 or WMP 9 or WMP 10 if you prefer to even with XP SP3. I'm using WMP 10 myself with XP SP3, and have IE6 installed for when compatibilities require an IE browser. Just be careful when you go to Windows Update as to which updates you select.

Microsoft has moved IE7 to a "high-priority" update from "recommended" which I recall it formerly being. So if you just use Automatic Updates with Auto Install, IE7 will creep on in there. WMP 11 is still listed as "optional", so it shouldn't do anything stealthy.

You can uninstall IE7 and go back to IE6 though Add/Remove Programs. You'll have to use a System Restore to get WMP 10 back.

The only thing I prefer WMP 10 for is its much more Luna-friendly interface colours. Otherwise I find it much more unstable than WMP 11, but for aesthetics I still use it. I'm curious what you like about it?

edit: Unless perhaps you mean from an XP SP3 CD-ROM? I only have an XP SP2 CD-ROM, so maybe they did include those on the SP3 CD-ROM.

 

I did a fresh install of SP3 and I had to install IE7 and WMP11 separately.

 

So, I do not think it's "really necessary" to have SP3 installed. I don't see any difference at all (at least, in performance) between SP2 and SP3 for day to day use. I guess if you don't have problem with your current XP, you won't need SP3.

However, having SP3 doesn't cause any disadvantages either. So, if one day you feel like reinstalling Windows XP, it wouldn't hurt to install SP3.

 

I ended up installing SP3 -- seems to be running better than last time I installed it, thanks for the input though!

 

Not so, at least not vis-a-vis IE7 - unless, of course, you're willing to give me more credit as a computer geek than I really deserve, since I've had my wife's system running XPSP3 and IE6 for months now without any perceptible problems.

EDIT: On the original topic - better yet, is XP even really necessary? - why not simply stick with Win2K, or WinME, or Win98, Win95, or - heaven forbid - Win3.1?

On balance, if you have XP, you should install SP3 unless, like an earlier poster, you have a specific reason for not doing so, such as an incompatibility with a major app you use constantly (and which you cannot replace with a compatible version).

 

MY MSDN XP+SP3 disc installs those by default.

 

I heared that windows 2000 doesnt properly support dualcore cpus, unless you get the PRO Version, and apparantly has security problems in it still, but i could be mistaken. I have an Win 2K Pro disk lieing arround somewhere, i might try it out

 

The only reason not to install XP SP3 would be if you are worried about the legitimacy of your current XP installation. It will basically ask you to re register XP. If you cannot (for whatever reason) XP will be shut down within 30 days or so.

If you are a legitimate user, you will be not be asked to register again after XP SP3 install.

(I know Acers OEM stuff works like this). I had zero problems. But I am legit.

Happened to a friend of mine though.

He ended up buying Vista.

I am sure there are ways around this but they cannot be discussed here as they are against forum rules.

Cheers,
Theo

 

That's funny.
Because there is ONLY Windows 2000 Pro. The "Home" version was based on 9x not NT... you've probably heard of it... it's called Windows Millenium Edition.
Yes, being no longer updated, new exploits for 2000 will never be patched. But then again, I wouldn't depend on Microsoft updates for my security (thank you linux router).
Shyster is NOT suggesting you install XP. He is suggesting you keep your software up to date, as there are both advantages and disadvantages, however, the advantages are far greater. It would be insane to try to use Windows 9x on a modern computer just because it uses less resources, and people who refuse to use Vista or install service packs in XP are similarly confused.

 

That would be an interesting experiment to perform, but I wouldn't do it on a computer with a preexisting OS that I didn't have a cloned backup for, nor would I do it on a computer that I relied on to get things done because odds are you're going to get nothing but an unholy mess.

 

Interesting experiment indeed

2K Pro or whatever was waaaay before Dual Processor technology.

As it is, XP has needed lots of work to make it Dual Processor compatible.

XP is old too....circa 2000. 2K is even older.

But XP still has support and has adapted to changing times and the latest technology.....

And still runs like a dream (with SP3).

Cheers,
Theo

 

There have been servers with dual processors before Windows 2000 came out, you are talking about dual cores. Even Win NT supported multiple processors.

 

No.
Why is it that my 2000 licenses mention the number of CPUs they support?
1-2
1-4
Hmmm.

XP came out in 2002.
2000 came out in... 2000.

 

Windows XP has full support for multi-core processors and was nicely updated to keep up with latest technologies.

All in all, until Windows 7 comes out as a full version, XP Pro SP3 (32 bit) will do just fine.
Heck ... you can even keep XP as a 32 bit OS given it's support for present day technology/compatibility for older software, and dual boot into Win7 (64 bit) to take full advantage of the new technology (while retaining low resource use compared to Vista).

I consider the updates to be fairly important (especially when XP is in question, so I make sure to keep the OS up to date.

 

Whoa...I am going to get hammered on this one

At least I picked up a few "discussions" here. From folks that remember.

Cheers,
Theo

 

Funny. Last time I installed my XP with no SP it said 2001....

 

Ok, before we all get into a flame-war about when Win2K and XP were released, perhaps a little wiki-balm will salve the troubled mind?

According to this wikipedia article on Windows releases, Win2K was released in February of 2000, and XP was released October of 2001.

 

I rest my case on the 2K and XP release dates...

Canno't remember all well enough.

Just used a computer in those days. For work. Never real virus issues and stuff like now.

How times have changed.

Cheers,
Theo

 

Agreed - that's why I tend to have recourse to things like google and wikipedia so often - sort of like my mental walker!

 

Don't need wiki . I got a very good memory . I was right !

 

I used to, but at some point I think my brains hit the too-full point.

 

Women have that effect .

 

Well, since I have a wife and a 4-y.o. daughter, that would certainly explain a lot.

 

Heheh...I aint there but I got a girlfriend and she is )(*&^ nuts sometime .


So, is SP3 necessary? YES

 

i've noticed that after installing SP3, windows seems to act a little bit abnormally. 1 example: the network connection folder is empty. it's kinda weird.

 

Right, i found my XP2k Disk, im going to put a 3rd hdd into my system to boot it onto to, (system has space for 4 hdds)

If i can get it all working ill post some results, just need to find a 2.5" sata hdd haha

And my XP disk is legit, i bought Vista Buisness - So that i could have vista and xp rolled into 1 licence

 

I'm curious, what barebone is your system based off of?

 

I'm not to sure on the model, my parents purchased it for a christmas present for me, but i had it early.

I'll have to try and find out, it seems pretty nice though.

When you take the bottom off which comes off as 1 whole aluminium panel, there is 2 x dual harddrive bays ( the harddrives stack 1 ontop of the other) 2 DDR2 slots, 2 DDR3 slots. and 1 MXM graphics card slot. The motherboard has Asus printed on it from what i saw; dont really wanna mess arround too much in there though only opened it up to put the SSD drive in.

 

that's all fit into a 15.4" package?
O_O

 

Just remember, once you get married, you'll always be last in line from there on out, and will always be the pack-animal (honey, can you carry this teeensy little bag for me, >bat< >bat<); once you've gotten your head around that thought, and it no longer makes you do this - - then, and only then, will you be (maybe) ready to get married.

And, because I'm not just a dyed-in-the-wool sexist, we also have to remember that it goes both ways, and women ought to consider carefully that they're much more likely to see some hairy, half-shaven grumpus scratching in places that really shouldn't be scratched except in the privacy of a locked, private bathroom, than they can really imagine. Once she gets her head around that thought, and it no longer makes her do this - (it'll always make her do a little of this - - unfortunately), then, and only then, will she be (maybe) ready to get married.

As the old adage goes, in this life we all have our particular crosses to bear (something to keep in mind especially during this season).

 

Pardon me for being a doubting thomas, but I'd also be very interested in knowing the precise brand of your barebones; the largest number of hdds that I am aware of that can be found in a single notebook is three, and the notebooks that can accomodate three hdds are 17" monsters like the Clevo D901C - I'd be seriously concerned about the thermal issues in a 15.4" notebook sporting four hdds and a discrete video card, given the huge number of heat-related problems the current crop of 15.4" systems with discrete video cards and only one hdd have been having.