Thanks for the input, Greg. And sorry if I unleashed too
many hounds. I certainly didn't intend to engage in any
MS-bashing [this time ;-)], although I must say I enjoy
(and expect) a little good-natured OS-bashing anyway.
No OS I've ever used is above reproach (and the
market leader can always expect some flak regardless
of what they do). I recommend a dose of V. Rossi to
any who may have taken offense at my post or those
generated in response.
Back to the point, I do have SP1 on some boxes and will
apply it (sorry, I mean SP2 now) as the need arises. I just
wanted to know if there were good reasons compelling me
to do so en masse ASAP. I believe the answer is no.
J. Greg Mackinnon wrote:
> Let me make a more serious response than my more flip one from earlier
> today. You do not NEED SP2 now, but you WILL need it eventually...
> probably in about a year, depending on your circumstances. Why?
> Simple... Microsoft support services. As of next month, Windows XP RTM
> (that is, XP with no service packs) will be DESUPPORTED by Microsoft.
> There will be NO FURTHER critical updates available for pre-SP1 XP
> systems. Eventually, SP1 will become de-supported as well.
> Certainly there is no great rush to apply SP2. And yes, "Greg" and
> other CIT staff will perform the required "lead user" testing so that
> deployments of SP2 go more smoothly for the rest of you. As far as I
> know, there are no application compatibility problems for which we do
> not have a workaround, but there could be a few more bumps out there
> waiting to snag us. PLEASE let us know about other application
> compatibility problems you may have experienced.
> I will ignore all the flame bait (Mr. Houston), and address Ernie's
> legitimate points below:
> Ernie Buford wrote:
>> J. Greg Mackinnon wrote:
>> Many of our machines don't even have SP1.... but have gotten the
>> critical updates to keep them relatively trouble-free.
> Well, that will have to change soon. As stated above, XP RTM is going
> off support. You now have a choice... apply SP1 and about 60 separate
> updates (requiring several reboots per system), or apply SP2 and only
> about two additional updates (and then deal with any broken
> applications). Both choices have their advantages and disadvantages.
>> We try not to run IE anymore and already have a pop-up blocker via
>> Mozilla or Google toolbar.
> Fair enough.
>> I don't find a biweekly visit to Windows Update for *critical* fixes
>> very painful or even all that time-consuming, but I don't do this for
>> 50+ machines either. (If I did I suppose I'd make it more automated
> That is the exact reason that we advocate use of automatic updates.
> Most departments do not have sufficient in-house technical support or
> expertise to run these updates manually (at least, not with any
> consistency). Careful application of firewall policies, automatic
> updates, and antivirus products will stop MOST infestations with a
> minimum of manual intervention.
> -Greg Mackinnon
> CIT Client Services
Ernest W. Buford
Rubenstein School of Environment
and Natural Resources
University of Vermont
Burlington, VT 05405