Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Windows Operating Systems Software IT

Windows XP SP3 Build 3205 Released w/ New Features 286

Posted by Zonk
from the new-tricks-for-an-old-dog dept.
jBubba writes "Windows XP SP3 build 3205 is the first official & authorized release of the next Windows XP service pack; and has been made available to testers as a part of the Windows Server 2008/Windows Vista SP1 beta program. NeoSmart Technologies has the run-down on the included 1,073 patches/hotfixes including security updates. Contrary to popular belief, Windows XP SP3 does ship with new features/components, most of which have been backported from Windows Vista. Some included features: 'New Windows Product Activation model: no need to enter product key during setup. Network Access Protection modules and policies have been brought to XP after being one of the more-well-received features in Windows Vista. New Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographic Module - the Windows XP SP3 kernel now includes an entire module that provides easy access to multiple cryptographic algorithms and is available for use in kernel-mode drivers and services. New "Black Hole Router" detection - Windows XP SP3 can detect and protect against rogue routers that are discarding data.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows XP SP3 Build 3205 Released w/ New Features

Comments Filter:
  • all in the subject
    • I hate new features. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by khasim (1285)
      I was a service pack to only fix the bugs.

      If there are new features, release them as a separate "upgrade".

      Having both mixed together makes testing a real pain.
      • by tacocat (527354) <tallison1 AT twmi DOT rr DOT com> on Sunday October 07, 2007 @04:36PM (#20891043)

        You're missing the real significance to this. They are back porting features from Vista!!! That's removing the incentive for migration from XP to VISTA on features alone. Considering the historic business model they have used, this is reason for further thought.

        Dell and others have pushed Microsoft into a position where they (OEM) are allowed to continue selling XP software beyond the originally intended dates set by Microsoft. This is the first time anyone ever successfully told Microsoft what to do, including the US Government (interestingly enough).

        Now that there is a continuance of XP in the market, the best thing that Microsoft can provide that customer base with secure products. If they fail to then it gives credence to the competition laying claims on security. If I remember, one of the points Microsoft was selling XP on was the security it provided above the Windows 2000/98/95 platforms. So there is something of a commitment they have made to keep it secure.

        If there's a diminished reason to migrate to Vista, as already demonstrated, then what?

        • by hedwards (940851) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @05:03PM (#20891221)

          You're missing the real significance to this. They are back porting features from Vista!!! That's removing the incentive for migration from XP to VISTA on features alone. Considering the historic business model they have used, this is reason for further thought.

          That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that if they backport a few features it might make less technically inclined people a bit less apprehensive about getting a new computer with Vista on it.

          I suspect that the features aren't going to be any of the most important ones, and will probably be ignored by XP users, but I doubt that it will really hold people back from upgrading. The main reasons people are not upgrading have little to do with the new features, and much more with things like the lack of driver support.
          • by ShieldW0lf (601553) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @06:21PM (#20891757) Journal
            That's another way of looking at it. Another way is that they were given a shitload of money from people in the large media industries, and a red carpet right into the service-provider model that they so desperately want, only people are attempting to rebel against this, so they need to find another way to deliver the locks and keys onto peoples desktops.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by paganizer (566360)
              Just to be clear, you are implying that they are taking the worst parts of Vista, the DRM and hassle, and putting that into XP? this would be to make it so that there is no reason not to "upgrade" to Vista, as both products will suck pretty much equally?
              Sounds about right. Darn good thing I'm sticking with Win2k until they pry it from my cold, dead hard drive.
          • by cmacb (547347) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @08:23PM (#20892609) Homepage Journal

            I suspect that the features aren't going to be any of the most important ones,


            Right.

            The most important features of Vista were dropped before it ever hit the street.
        • by suv4x4 (956391) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @05:26PM (#20891409)
          You're missing the real significance to this. They are back porting features from Vista!!! That's removing the incentive for migration from XP to VISTA on features alone. Considering the historic business model they have used, this is reason for further thought.

          I've been thinking the same thing, and still, I don't know if pressure alone made them backport Vista features. People just want the patches rolled up in a SP. Vista security features was unexpected move.

          Put this next to the toned down Vista campaign.

          I have the feeling Microsoft are fully aware of the problems of Vista, and I wouldn't be too surprised to see them gradually backporting the better accepted core/security Vista features to XP until they arrive at a slimmer Vista, and throwing away or redoing the ill mouthed Vista features (such as the current allow/deny security model which often asks the wrong questions and doesn't learn, or clarify the source of the action).

          If only they realized this, they wouldn't waste 5 years on grand vision ideas and arriving at an OS that's basically worse than the sum of its parts.

          Vista: the spare parts OS. Backport and reuse as needed.

        • by nurb432 (527695)
          Didnt they once say that it wasnt even possible to backport things since the vista kernel was 'so revolutionary' ?
        • by RAMMS+EIN (578166) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @05:56PM (#20891615) Homepage Journal
          ``Dell and others have pushed Microsoft into a position where they (OEM) are allowed to continue selling XP software beyond the originally intended dates set by Microsoft. This is the first time anyone ever successfully told Microsoft what to do, including the US Government (interestingly enough).''

          In Soviet Russia, government controls commerce.
        • "You're missing the real significance to this. They are back porting features from Vista!!! "

          What features would those be, better DRM and anti-piracy features?

          Hardly compelling...

        • by cHiphead (17854)
          And you're missing the REAL LIFE significance to this... IT departments everywhere are cringing in fear with thought of backporting 'Vista' fixes and features. Vista is an absolute NIGHTMARE for corporate IT. I can't wait to see what SP3 does to my clients networks, especially with features like 'black hole router detection', I foresee a lot of downtime for individual workstations. On the plus side, it will mean more billable hours for me, hell I'm only at 1580 for the year right now. ;)

          Cheers.
          • by Allador (537449) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @07:43PM (#20892297)
            Funny, I'm an IT department for many companies, and I'm not cringing in fear or having nightmares over Vista.

            For corporate IT, Vista is easy. Roll it out when and only when, its been tested, proven, and your organization is ready for it. Until then, just dont roll it out. Easy as pie. Now, if you've got end-users buying machines and trying to connect them to corporate resources without your control, then thats not corporate IT, thats just a bunch of people doing whatever they want.

            And the black hole router detection is useful, and makes a lot of sense. If you're seeing problems with it, then it just may not be fully baked yet, and you need to give it time to settle out.

            I mean geez, its not like anyone is forcing anybody to upgrade or anything. Your orgs should probably be at least considering buying vista with all new machines now, or as part of your VM purchasing, and just use the downlevel install options for now, that way you own it when you're ready.

            If you're encouraging your clients to install Vista, when you know they're not ready for it, and its not ready for them, then you're a bad consultant.

            If you're telling them its not ready, and they're doing it anyway, and then calling you for help, then you deserve every penny and more from those hours, cause you've got bad clients. :)
      • You know, somewhere around Windows NT 4 service pack 4, they announced they would do this. No new features in service packs, just bug fixes. They even stuck to it for a few months.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Bacon Bits (926911)
      I doubt it. Windows 2000 SP4 was still shipped with IE 5.01 (the version that shipped originally), and, indeed, it is the only way to apply the last service pack for IE 5.01.
    • Microsoft recently pushed out a stealth update to XP that reportedly breaks repairing the OS. Does anyone know if SP3 will install after Microsoft pushed out that last non-optional and hidden update?

      And I'm with the other folks - service packs are supposed to fix things. Not that I don't mind new features, but where I run XP, I'd like to have it be a two step process.

      It looks like Microsoft has finally owned up to the Vista fiasco. I can't help but think this would not be hitting the streets if Vista
    • %$^^&, i hope not (Score:3, Insightful)

      by someone1234 (830754)
      I need only DX10, but that is definitely not in the package. So M$, screw your SP.
  • yeah (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Almir (1096395) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:20PM (#20890421)
    i can't help thinking sp3 will make xp so much like vista, that you might as well go the whole way. sure hope i'm wrong though.
    • And ... wouldn't that be the point? I sure hope you're wrong too.
    • by RAMMS+EIN (578166)
      Meh, it will still look like a christmas tree. Vista does actually look rather nice. Which is the _only_ good thing I have to say about it.
  • by rueger (210566) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:23PM (#20890461) Homepage
    "Windows XP SP3 build 3205 ... has been made available to testers as a part of the ...Windows Vista SP1 beta program."

    God, I love this company!
  • by Daimanta (1140543) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:29PM (#20890515) Journal
    The Windows Server 2008/Windows Vista SP1 beta program is not in charge of Gundam.
    • by zerojoker (812874)
      --verbose please... I don't get this one...
      • by Nimey (114278)
        fnord!
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by yanos (633109)
        Read me [slashdot.org]

        For those too lazy, apparently some people over the ministry of agriculture of Japan were caught editing the Gundam page on Wikipedia while they were supposed to work. Hence the phrase "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam".
  • WGA will doom it. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Deathlizard (115856) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:32PM (#20890549) Homepage Journal
    If it's got WGA like Windows Vista? Then no thanks.

    That's the only reason we're staying away from Vista, and if this new activation is anything like that then it's SP2 until they drop support for it, and maybe something else (Linux, OSX) after that.

    I've said my reasons we stay away from Vista In my Journal. [slashdot.org] I'm sure we're not the only workplaces saying the same thing. Especially if the computers are not anchored to the network and are off the network for months at a time like our systems are.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by alexhs (877055)

      if it's got WGA like Windows Vista? Then no thanks.

      That's the only reason we're staying away from Vista,
      And I guess it was the same reason to keep w2k and stay away from xp ? Why are you using xp then ?
      If this is your only reason, you better switch right now, as applications will soon require this sp anyway, or require vista.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Deathlizard (115856)
        Why are you using xp then

        At the time we made the OS decision, We were running Windows 98/ME for whatever reason and XP was out for 5-6 months. Since we knew 2000 was on the way out and XP didn't have WGA or activation at the time for corporate accounts, we didn't see any reason not to switch to XP.

        Eventually WGA came out, but it was still optional with corporate accounts. WSUS servers don't send out or receive the WGA updates Even if you wanted them. You would only get the updates by going directly to Windo
  • by Chas (5144) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:33PM (#20890555) Homepage Journal
    "Are you SURE you wouldn't like to upgrade to Windows Vista?"

    [Upgrade Now] [Upgrade RIGHT NOW] [FUBAR Existing System]
  • So that when Windows wants to secretly download an update or send your data back to Microsoft, and you prevent them from doing so at the router level, they'll be able to detect it?
    • by pchan- (118053) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @04:31PM (#20891003) Journal

      So that when Windows wants to secretly download an update or send your data back to Microsoft, and you prevent them from doing so at the router level, they'll be able to detect it?
      No. A black hole router is a router that incorrectly handles MTUs that are bigger than it can pass. That is, instead of fragmenting the packets, it just silently drops them. This makes for some very unreliable connections as only the bigger packets get dropped and smaller ones get through. This is usually a problem at the ISP level and has nothing to do with Windows updates. I now return you to your regularly scheduled tin foil hat.
      • by Kjella (173770)
        Hey, wait your saying that Microsoft is not only fixing their own problems, but are also fixing crappy products other companies make? Better introduce those kinds of news gently, some of the slashbots may suffer an apoplectic shock.
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by Super_Z (756391)
          Well, according to this article: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/columns/cableguy/cg0704.mspx [microsoft.com] ,
          PMTU black hole router detection seems to have been included in Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003.

          So I guess it was a feature of the BSD TCP/IP stack they put in there?

          As an aside, the same article describes the alternaltive way to change the IP MTU: Edit the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Network\{4D36E972-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318} registry key.
          You just gotta lov
      • A black hole router is a router that incorrectly handles MTUs that are bigger than it can pass.

        The term "blackhole router" has a completely different meaning these days. A lot of ISPs intentionally claim to have a route for traffic and drop the traffic as a way of filtering malicious traffic, like DDoS attacks. Technically this may be "incorrect" but it keeps servers running an accessible during a DDoS attack and is a vital tool for network security engineers at tier 1 and 2 ISPs. How this feature will affect the situation depends upon how they implemented it and what it actually does.

  • by Opportunist (166417) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:45PM (#20890643)
    most of which have been backported from Windows Vista.

    Including DirectX 10? Few things about Vista are interesting besides that.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by n dot l (1099033)
      Not a chance. MS has chosen to tie DX10 to their new display driver model (they completely rewrote the line between user-space DX and kernel-space DX), which is tied to changes in the kernel...which interacts with all sorts of other shit in Vista (etc, etc). It's not that it can't be implemented without the new driver model (after all, NVIDIA's already supporting DX10 equivalent OpenGL extensions on XP - and Linux), just that it has been implemented that way. There's no way MS will spend money doing a massi
      • by Joce640k (829181) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @06:33PM (#20891823) Homepage
        DirectX is just a COM interface to the video driver.

        The main differences between DX9 and DX10 are new shaders and getting rid of all the legacy capability bits, neither of which has any dependency on the operating system or driver model.

        I bet that if Microsoft gave the go-ahead to ATI/NVIDIA/INTEL there'd be DX10 support for XP in the very next release. The only reason they aren't doing it is because Microsoft is artificially blocking them.

        They did the exact same thing with OpenGL when Vista was in Beta. Microsoft went around making a lot of noise saying "It can't be done!!" but the driver writers were saying it was easy. Eventually they gave in and Bingo! We have OpenGL on Vista.

        • by suv4x4 (956391) on Monday October 08, 2007 @03:23AM (#20895365)
          What "massive rewrite" [..] The main differences between DX9 and DX10 are new shaders and getting rid of all the legacy capability bits, neither of which has any dependency on the operating system or driver model.

          Oh you missed the part about the rewritten API and Object Model?
          Or about the new kernel mode / userspace mode separation of the GUI (DX10 does, in fact, depend on new kernel features)?
          Did you also miss the fact DX10 GPU's can natively multithread?
          Or that they can use virtual memory?

          Now, whether you can get it on XP or not: port enough of the Vista bits back and you can get everything in XP, you can in fact just slap XP label on Vista and call it a day.

          Whether Microsoft should do that is another issue. It's perfectly legitimate of them to put major efforts on their new OS. I'll be happy if they, however, are quicker next time with the stability/security fixes on their legacy OS. I've been waiting for XP SP3 forever.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by TheRaven64 (641858)

        It's not that it can't be implemented without the new driver model (after all, NVIDIA's already supporting DX10 equivalent OpenGL extensions on XP - and Linux), just that it has been implemented that way. There's no way MS will spend money doing a massive re-write/back-port of DX10

        They might if game designers start looking at nVidia's OpenGL extensions and thinking 'if we used OpenGL, we could get the same graphics quality as DirectX 10 with the same potential audience as DirectX 9. Maybe we could even do a Mac port cheaply...'

  • by shawnmchorse (442605) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:45PM (#20890647) Homepage
    It might actually get some traction that way, if it's not just being used to shove Windows Vista at people...:p
  • by Hymer (856453) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:50PM (#20890671)
    But didn't Microsoft say that it is impossible to backport features to XP from Vista due to major differences in the system ?
    ...and since it is possible, will we be getting DirectX 10 on XP too ?
    ...and if not, why not ?
    --
    btw. how can this be good for Vista ?
  • Network Access Protection modules and policies have been brought to XP after being one of the more-well-received features in Windows Vista.
    What exactly does that mean, is this only the client for the Non-Windows-and-old-Windows-Client-Lockout-feature of Windows Server 2008?
    How can it be well received in Vista if Server 2008 is not yet out, and who well-received it? Or is there more to this feature?
  • Blackhole Avoidance? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @03:58PM (#20890743)

    Does anyone have any details on the blackhole routing avoidance feature? While the summary claims blackhole routers are "rogue" routers, blackhole routing is the most common way to stop DDoS attacks and excessive worm traffic from giant botnets of Windows machines. If the OS now offers botnet operators an easy way to bypass that rerouting of malware traffic, this could have serious detrimental affects upon the internet as a whole.

    • by the unbeliever (201915) <chris+slashdot@@@atlgeek...com> on Sunday October 07, 2007 @04:46PM (#20891095) Homepage
      black hole routers are not null routes.

      black hole routers just drop packets that are "too big"; null routes are self explanatory, and are how most ISP's stop DOS attacks.
      • black hole routers are not null routes. black hole routers just drop packets that are "too big"; null routes are self explanatory, and are how most ISP's stop DOS attacks.

        Blackhole routing, refers to any routing of packets, where you claim you can deliver the route, then drop the packet anyway, whether because of the size or any other characteristic. At least that is how it is used in the industry. Both my company and several of our competitors who sell devices designed to protect against DDoS attacks have a mitigation method referred to as "blackhole route."

        Regardless of what you want to call it, if Windows is starting to try some sort of verification and automated avoi

        • by Slashcrap (869349) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @06:41PM (#20891861)
          Regardless of what you want to call it, if Windows is starting to try some sort of verification and automated avoidance of such routes it could interfere with said defenses, possible resulting in routing loops, DDoSing a router somewhere, or use of more advanced defensive techniques.

          You seem slightly confused about how the Internet works, so I'm guessing you work in sales. How exactly is your average Windows machine going to avoid these routes? Or influence the paths that its packets take once they've gone past the first router in any meaningful way whatsoever? Theoretically you can do some tricks with the various lesser known ICMP message types to change the routes that your packets take, but you don't seriously think that shit still works in real life do you? Just try doing some source routing from an average ADSL connected host and see how far you get. I guess if the Windows box was acting as a router for an ISP and running BGP then it could be an issue, but we're getting into the realms of surreal comedy here. Just remember that as a general rule your ISP decides how to route your packets, not you.

          I'm pretty sure that the "black hole" stuff they're talking about is the old PMTU black hole issue. I'm equally sure that Windows 95 had a registry setting that turned on black hole detection, so I'd love to know what's actually new here.
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by cnettel (836611)
            A guess (but nothing else) is that it would also relate to the behavior when you have two interfaces providing theoretical routes to the target address, with different metrics, but one of them turns out to be unreliable. In that case, the strategy chosen by the local machine can clearly influence the result. (If your WLAN is actually more reliable than your cat5 that the cat toyed with yesterday...)
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            You seem slightly confused about how the Internet works, so I'm guessing you work in sales.

            Nope.

            How exactly is your average Windows machine going to avoid these routes?

            That's a good question. Seeing as no one seems to have any details on how this is supposed to work, that's the reason I brought the topic up.

            Theoretically you can do some tricks with the various lesser known ICMP message types to change the routes that your packets take, but you don't seriously think that shit still works in real life do you?

            Theoretically there are a lot of routing tricks you can use and there are even more if you don't mind violating standards. What I'm more concerned with is if they're using some routing tricks that cause problems now, but on a wide scale by Windows, then in systems where, for example, you're passing some traffic with a GRE tunnel that re-onramps it to a do

  • Just for giggles, I followed the link in the base post, and got to the Microsoft Login page for downloading the SP. I tried to login, and my browser started going through various pages in a continuous loop. When I tried to break out of the loop it told me that "login does not work from here."

    Pretty hilarious.

    Now, I think I will wait until after someone documents how to install SP3 without having to install IE7 or that WGA garbage.
  • Mirror. (Score:5, Informative)

    by antdude (79039) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @04:31PM (#20891001) Homepage Journal
    NeoSmart server seems to be down. Here's a mirror [networkmirror.com].
  • by Anonymous Coward
    I don't care a flying fsck about Aero and other Vista crap, I'm a Unix user who is forced by a bunch of applications to keep at home one Windows machine working. I don't play games, music or movies on this machine and of course never use it to surf the web or reading emails: there's zero personal data in its disk, therefore any spyware from Microsoft backported from Vista will be no harm to my data.
    What I'm concerned about is the driver and software compatibility, stability and memory/resource consumption,
  • Halo 2? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by charlieo88 (658362) on Sunday October 07, 2007 @09:54PM (#20893311)
    But will XP SP3 be able to play Halo 2, a game that a pentium III Xbox can run, but apparently too complicated for anything less than Vista?

An inclined plane is a slope up. -- Willard Espy, "An Almanac of Words at Play"

Working...