Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Details On Windows XP SP3 Leaked

Posted by kdawson on Sun Apr 27, 2008 04:15 AM
from the man-on-the-inside dept.
Operating Systems Software Windows Microsoft
crazyeyes notes the leak of 7 pages of secret Microsoft information on the upcoming Service Pack for Windows XP. Quoting: "We were the first to break the news on the release of Windows Vista Service Pack 1 and the final RTM schedule of Windows XP Service Pack 3. Now, we will be the first to release the full details on Microsoft's Windows XP Service Pack 3, which as we know will be available for manual update on April 29, 2008."
+ -
story

Related Stories

Submission: Secret details on Windows XP Service Pack 3 leaked by crazyeyes (1091733)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Details On Windows XP SP3 Leaked 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • This big news... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Jafafa Hots (580169) on Sunday April 27 2008, @04:19AM (#23212738) Homepage Journal
    "Windows XP Service Pack 3 will contain hotfixes and updates released since Windows XP SP2."

    The rest of the details aren't quite as shocking. I hope nobody gets fired for leaking this controversial info.

    • DO NOT RTFA (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dreamchaser (49529) on Sunday April 27 2008, @04:35AM (#23212806) Homepage Journal
      It's an empty non-story with NO new information. Don't reward them with ad hits.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Once again adblock allows me to see just how appalling the site is without helping fund this "news".

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by el americano (799629)
            That's the main reason why I want an adblocker for FF that loads the ads, but doesn't display them. The other reason is that I don't want to be detected blocking ads, although that hasn't been a problem so far.

      • Re:DO NOT RTFA (Score:5, Funny)

        by eclectro (227083) on Sunday April 27 2008, @04:58AM (#23212878)

        It's an empty non-story with NO new information. Don't reward them with ad hits.
        Furthermore, the operating system that it is about is a non-story with NO meaningful improvements. Don't reward them with an install.

      • Re:DO NOT RTFA (Score:5, Funny)

        by WK2 (1072560) on Sunday April 27 2008, @05:02AM (#23212892) Homepage
        Way ahead of you, man. I already didn't RTFA, and didn't plan to. I was just going to leave a bunch of comments on it, and imply that I read it.

      • Re:DO NOT RTFA (Score:5, Funny)

        by IBBoard (1128019) on Sunday April 27 2008, @05:03AM (#23212896) Homepage
        How likely is that anyway? 1) It's TFA and this is Slashdot and 2) it's about Windows and not Linux/Unix/other geeky stuff. That leaves a tiny proportion of /.ers as potential link clickers ;)

        • What we need... (Score:5, Funny)

          by jd (1658) <imipak.yahoo@com> on Sunday April 27 2008, @06:44AM (#23213222) Homepage Journal
          ...in HTML 5 is the ability to generate negative clicks. Negative clicking an ad-ridden site would give them negative numbers of viewers.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by CastrTroy (595695)
            I wonder if we could build a plugin, that would give them so many extra clicks, such that their advertisers wouldn't believe that they actually generated that many hits, and would refuse to pay, on the grounds that they couldn't have possibly gotten so many hits. Basically just reload the page 500 times, possibly deleting any cookies so and making a minor change in the user agent so you look like a different person. Sure it's the same IP address, but I don't think they would really want to only count uniqu
            • I am sure we could, but why would we want to undermine a revenue model that brings us all the benefit of free (for us) content? Doesn't make any sense at all to me, as this content has to be paid for somehow. Would you prefer to personally pay for page views of information that would be important to you? I wouldn't, and therefore am quite happy to accept pages decorated with advertisements if it contains content interesting to me.
              • I don't mind ads for the most part. I don't block ads on most sites. Slashdot seems to do a pretty good job supporting themselves, and the ads are pretty minimally invasive. Google doesn't do too bad either. And their ads are about as non-invasive as you get. What bothers me are the sites that put each paragraph on a separate page, or those that give you giant flashy pop-ups, or flash/js ads that hover over the text you are trying to read. I am much more likely to click on an ad if it doesn't annoy me

      • Re:DO NOT RTFA (Score:5, Funny)

        by niceone (992278) * on Sunday April 27 2008, @05:14AM (#23212936) Journal
        DO NOT RTFA

        I have mod points, but unfortunately there is no +1 Redundant.
    • Well, the important point to take home is that SP3 will be at least as vapid as this "techarp.com" article was, and that will surely be good news for anyone who was worried that Microsoft would go all Vista on this final XP service pack.

      • Re:This big news... (Score:5, Informative)

        by blake1 (1148613) on Sunday April 27 2008, @04:45AM (#23212834)
        SP3 is 316MB.
        • Can you slipstream it into an install less than 700mb?

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Tony Hoyle (11698)
            It's not exactly secret - the RC has been available for months and the final release has been on MSDN for ages.. and we're geeks right? We either have MSDN or know someone that does.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by poulbailey (231304)
            The story isn't wrong per se. Here's what Microsoft has to say (from the PDF I linked elsewhere):

            Through Windows Update, the download size varies, but it is typically 70 megabytes (MB), depending on the
            computer's configuration. Through the Download Center, the download size is approximately 580 MB.
      • I found it to be very interesting, and I doubt that I am the only one, as his pages are nearly slashdotted at the moment. For some reason, my installation of WinXP Pro stopped accepting updates about 8 months ago, and I shudder to think about what unpatched vulnerabilities exist on it now. I really look forward to SP 3 resolving the problem and bringing my OS up to date, as I will continue running XP for a long time to come yet. I have no intention of upgrading to Vista. I certainly don't mind if the author

  • Something to take note of (Score:5, Informative)

    by blake1 (1148613) on Sunday April 27 2008, @04:34AM (#23212800)
    Allows users to complete their software setup without having to provide a product key.

    This isn't the case as far as I've experienced if you slipstream existing SP2 media with the latest service pack. Maybe you have to use new SP3 media from MS, who knows.

    • It's a feature mainly for business users so they can make a standard image that'll install unattended, probably depends on the type of license key. And from what I've understood you don't get away from activation, you just don't need to do it right at install time.
      • When slipstreaming you can just use the OEM key MS hand out to all system integrators, it will not activate but will allow install.

        If you have problems selling within the "reseal" window, you can always re-factory mode it and tell it to reset the activation period.

  • Secret Details? rubbish (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 27 2008, @04:47AM (#23212836)
    Every information about XP SP3 is available from MS website, and thats even more detailed. This is a crap article.

  • Links to service pack here... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 27 2008, @04:56AM (#23212872)
    The service pack has already been leaked (more info here [hishamrana.com] with usenet and bittorrent links). So far its working fine. There have been some scattered reports of problems but this is mainly due to people missing updates via glitches within Windows Update.

    1. My suggestion is everyone download Secunia PSI [secunia.com] to scan their systems for older/vulnerable software. Update all software it finds to be out of date.

    2. Use Filehippo.com's Update Checking utility [filehippo.com] to update any software that PSI misses.

    3. Use a registry cleaner and temporary file cleanup utility to CCleaner [ccleaner.com].

    Then do the update. It should go perfectly well then.
  • This article[Next page] has absolutely no[Next page] new or "secret" information[Next page] at all.[Next page] What a waste of [Next page] 5 minutes of my life.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Barny (103770)
      {huge banner ad}I am glad{huge banner ad}[Next page]{huge banner ad} it is slashdotted to{huge banner ad}[Next page]{huge banner ad} hell then.{huge banner ad}

  • News? (Score:4, Funny)

    by jcr (53032) <jcr&mac,com> on Sunday April 27 2008, @05:12AM (#23212930) Journal
    Windows continues to asymptotically approach adequacy. Film at 11.

    -jcr

  • DOJ mandates windows user interface now?! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gd23ka (324741) on Sunday April 27 2008, @05:35AM (#23212988) Homepage
    Check this: Address Bar on taskbar missing. This is no longer available at the request of the US Department Of Justice (DOJ) [techarp.com]

    If those parasites don't like it they should ask for a private build. What's next?!?
    • I'm sure some friendly neighborhood hacker will come through with a Windows patch. Just like the uxtheme.dll patches and the TCP > 10 concurrent connection attempts patch.
        • Oh man that was one change that stood out for me. I like having that address bar so I can just type in an URL and Firefox will automatically open up for me. It's used all the time. I currently have it as a stand-alone toolbar but if it is gone after a reboot, it's pointless.
  • An old bug where any version of visual studio (up to VS 2005) often hang in debug breakpoint if language toolbar enabled ?
    Latest I hear bug considered fixed because it fixed in Vista. But I still have some hope...
  • What is this, amateur night or bring the kids to work day? How could an editor pick this up as newsworthy? The Microsoft "secret" docs are actually public information, and have been since 11 April. We need an "R U 12" button around here.
  • As XP x64 follows the Server 2003 SP model, this does not apply. 2003 is currently on SP2, I don't see a date for sp3 (if there is one at all.) I found this at: http://news.softpedia.com/news/64-Bit-Windows-XP-Service-Pack-3-73982.shtml [softpedia.com]
  • I think that alex zarkoff is the worst for next page, to find out what I mean go to page 2... Oh and I love that nobody RsTFA (and I hope that actually DOES stand for reads the fucking article, and not something sophisticated)

  • Guys Chill (Score:5, Informative)

    by DarkOx (621550) on Sunday April 27 2008, @07:04AM (#23213284)
    Microsoft seems to have actually gotten this one right. Its the least envasive service pack I have seen in a long time. Its not that interesting really. It truely is as advertised pretty just a patch rollup. Which was long over due because there were like 78 patches out there against sp2 or something similar. The other thing this provides is the new rdp 6.1 client. I down loaded it to put on my test machines becase we are looking at deploying a few blades running Server 2008 for terminal services to replace or tired Citrix servers. You need the new rdp stuffs for that work right client side.

    All this does is let people who admin Windows networks to clean up the WSUS boxes, maybe make some slip stream disks more easily for new installs and image building, and use the advanced features of 2008's terminal server.
  • Why spend time reading an article that claims to be leaked information about the service pack. You can just install the also leaked service pack and see for yourself. Anyone who claims to be worthy of reading /. already knows at least a dozen places to download it :-)

    And I've had no problems with the three machines I've installed it on.
  • I've tested it on 9 different boxes, and it works fine.
    Disable any download managers you might be running, as I limit apache to 1 connection per IP.

    http://phb.btfh.net/temp2/ [btfh.net]
    • I can't possibly understand THAT behavior

      It's actually very easy to understand - Microsoft wants every XP user to buy Vista and to make it as difficult as possible for those of us who are "hanging on to dear life" to XP.

      • you are aware that Vistas SP1 can't be slipstreamed either? It's just as difficult in Vista as in XP ;)
    • Some of the mirror sites: www.p0wned.com, www.dlwarez.com and www.freetoolbar.com

      But seriously, seven different file sizes, depending on the mirror you go with? This sounds more like Harry's House of Mirrors...heh, I look pretty good in the thin one!

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.