SP3 - Status Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fred S *****
  • Start date Start date
>I have lots of apps and drivers, why is that an issue?
>
>As a matter of fact, *Everything* except BIOS is fully up to date, but
>are you implying that a piece of code that is not fully up to date is
>garbage?

The BIOS is the most important piece of software that communicates
what the operating system, it's devices, and software that
communicates to those devices can and can't do. If an update to the
BIOS has been done to rectify some problem or advance some feature
that allows to the OS and apps to communicate better and more
correctly with the hardware, why would you not update it?

I am not implying that a piece of code that is not up to date is
garbage, I am stating it is out of date, could contain errors, and can
potential cause a failure that can't always be traced back to a
program or the operating system. If motherboard makers had never
updated their BIOS to take into account the errata that is present in
the B2 stepping of the AMD Quad-core "Barcelona" CPU, users would be
banging their heads as to why the crashes that were occurring. It is
asinine to think the BIOS plays no role in why things can go wrong
with a computer.

- Thee Chicago Wolf
 
I think this is getting off topic.

I understand the importance of BIOS and have in the past updated BIOS
when necessary. I treat it as a special case because of the potential
hazards of updating it. I don't update BIOS unless there is a problem
occurring that suggests a BIOS update might fix it. I have no current
problems with my computers so I don't see the point of a BIOS update.
In fact, the Gigabyte web site specifically warns "Because BIOS
flashing is potentially risky, if you do not encounter problems using
the current version of BIOS, it is recommended that you not flash the
BIOS. ..."

John

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:51:30 -0500, Thee Chicago Wolf <.@.> wrote:

>>I have lots of apps and drivers, why is that an issue?
>>
>>As a matter of fact, *Everything* except BIOS is fully up to date, but
>>are you implying that a piece of code that is not fully up to date is
>>garbage?
>
>The BIOS is the most important piece of software that communicates
>what the operating system, it's devices, and software that
>communicates to those devices can and can't do. If an update to the
>BIOS has been done to rectify some problem or advance some feature
>that allows to the OS and apps to communicate better and more
>correctly with the hardware, why would you not update it?
>
>I am not implying that a piece of code that is not up to date is
>garbage, I am stating it is out of date, could contain errors, and can
>potential cause a failure that can't always be traced back to a
>program or the operating system. If motherboard makers had never
>updated their BIOS to take into account the errata that is present in
>the B2 stepping of the AMD Quad-core "Barcelona" CPU, users would be
>banging their heads as to why the crashes that were occurring. It is
>asinine to think the BIOS plays no role in why things can go wrong
>with a computer.
>
>- Thee Chicago Wolf
 
Fred S ***** wrote:

> The obvious reasons for holding off are all over this newsgroup -
> approximately 30% of the discussions here are related to problems with
> the damn service pack.
>
Now this clearly shows that you are not qualified to advise people on
anything. People posting here are those that have already got problems
with their systems well before SP3 was installed. They don't need to
spend their time here when they should be watching Euro 2008 or
something similar ( <http://www.euro2008.uefa.com/index.html> ). People
don't come here just to post their success in installing SP3 or that
they didn't have any problems what so ever.

I am surprised it is not 100% because these groups are for people with
any XP problems. So this simply reinforces our view that people having
problems with SP3 generally have other problems but they have less
knowledge about their own systems and they are just joining the
bandwagon of blaming SP3 or for that matter anything produced by Microsoft.

hth
 
I concur.


Gord

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:58:39 +0100, ANONYMOUS <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote:

>I am surprised it is not 100% because these groups are for people with
>any XP problems. So this simply reinforces our view that people having
>problems with SP3 generally have other problems but they have less
>knowledge about their own systems and they are just joining the
>bandwagon of blaming SP3 or for that matter anything produced by Microsoft.
 
What in your mind is 'obvious reasons'? If less than 1% of people with XP
have a problem show up when or after installing
SP3 and seek assistance here, is that an obvious reason? If 1000 people have
a problem out of perhaps 150 million, is that an obvious reason?
"Fred S *****" <"Fred S"@anonymous.com> wrote in message
news:uOZBVJoyIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>
> ANONYMOUS wrote:
>>
>> Fred S ***** wrote:
>>
>>> I have advised a number of people to hold off on installing SP3 for
>>> obvious reasons.
>>>
>>
>> There are no "obvious reasons" that we know of. could you cite some
>> examples! In fact it seems that you are not qualified to "advise" people
>> whether or not to install SP3 because your knowledge seems to be very
>> elementary.
>>
>> hth
>>
>>
> The obvious reasons for holding off are all over this newsgroup -
> approximately 30% of the discussions here are related to problems with the
> damn service pack.
>
> The use of "obvious" was in reference to a significant number of users
> reporting major system problems with either installation or dysfunctional
> problems with the OS after installation.
>
> Windows XP is considered the most stable OS that Microsoft has made
> available to users and the SP3 package has caused havoc with it.
>
> Now, what are you qualified to talk about?
>
> Fred
 
From my reading of the posting the "obvious reason" was "FUD". -)

Unknown wrote:

> What in your mind is 'obvious reasons'? If less than 1% of people with XP
> have a problem show up when or after installing
> SP3 and seek assistance here, is that an obvious reason? If 1000 people have
> a problem out of perhaps 150 million, is that an obvious reason?
> "Fred S *****" <"Fred S"@anonymous.com> wrote in message
> news:uOZBVJoyIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>>
>>ANONYMOUS wrote:
>>
>>>Fred S ***** wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I have advised a number of people to hold off on installing SP3 for
>>>>obvious reasons.
>>>>
>>>
>>>There are no "obvious reasons" that we know of. could you cite some
>>>examples! In fact it seems that you are not qualified to "advise" people
>>>whether or not to install SP3 because your knowledge seems to be very
>>>elementary.
>>>
>>>hth
>>>
>>>
>>
>>The obvious reasons for holding off are all over this newsgroup -
>>approximately 30% of the discussions here are related to problems with the
>>damn service pack.
>>
>>The use of "obvious" was in reference to a significant number of users
>>reporting major system problems with either installation or dysfunctional
>>problems with the OS after installation.
>>
>>Windows XP is considered the most stable OS that Microsoft has made
>>available to users and the SP3 package has caused havoc with it.
>>
>>Now, what are you qualified to talk about?
>>
>>Fred
>
>
>
 
I agree but, isn't that sheer stupidity?
"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ut58oV9yIHA.420@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> From my reading of the posting the "obvious reason" was "FUD". -)
>
> Unknown wrote:
>
>> What in your mind is 'obvious reasons'? If less than 1% of people with XP
>> have a problem show up when or after installing
>> SP3 and seek assistance here, is that an obvious reason? If 1000 people
>> have a problem out of perhaps 150 million, is that an obvious reason?
>> "Fred S *****" <"Fred S"@anonymous.com> wrote in message
>> news:uOZBVJoyIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>
>>>
>>>ANONYMOUS wrote:
>>>
>>>>Fred S ***** wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I have advised a number of people to hold off on installing SP3 for
>>>>>obvious reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>There are no "obvious reasons" that we know of. could you cite some
>>>>examples! In fact it seems that you are not qualified to "advise"
>>>>people
>>>>whether or not to install SP3 because your knowledge seems to be very
>>>>elementary.
>>>>
>>>>hth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>The obvious reasons for holding off are all over this newsgroup -
>>>approximately 30% of the discussions here are related to problems with
>>>the damn service pack.
>>>
>>>The use of "obvious" was in reference to a significant number of users
>>>reporting major system problems with either installation or dysfunctional
>>>problems with the OS after installation.
>>>
>>>Windows XP is considered the most stable OS that Microsoft has made
>>>available to users and the SP3 package has caused havoc with it.
>>>
>>>Now, what are you qualified to talk about?
>>>
>>>Fred
>>
>>
>>
>
 
Back
Top