Windows XP SP3 Build 3205 Released w/ New Features

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.'"

yeah

[Almir]

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.

Re:Hooray

[Anonymous Coward]

uh no, you fucking idiot. Now go kill yourself

WGA will doom it.

[Deathlizard]

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.

DirectX 10 support?

[shawnmchorse]

It might actually get some traction that way, if it's not just being used to shove Windows Vista at people...:p

Re:The only thing that's interesting

[n dot l]

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 massive re-write/back-port of DX10...especially since that's one of the main selling points of Vista (now that an actual DX10 game has been released).

Re:Vista Sound

[nuzak]

> knowing nothing about Windows Vista that sounds like an extremely stupid feature.

Sounds like you've distilled the standard slashdot response to any Vista article.

Of course as soon as Linux copies the feature, then it's a great idea.

Re:I hate new features.

[tacocat]

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?

Re:I hate new features.

[hedwards]

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.

Re:adding gasoline to the fire

[suv4x4]

so now those viruses that morph and encrypt themselves to prevent detection ... we can't search for the little bit of code at the start that decrypts them because they'll just use a nice convenient windows API.

The cryptographic API-s in Windows, just like the cryptographic API-s in OSX and Linux, are used for hashing and crypoting data using industry standard algorithms.

This is what IE uses for SSL sessions, for example.

Let me ask you something: why do you have to speak about things you have no clue about and make a fool of yourself in front of us? Yes, actually by spreading moronic FUD, you make people listen less to legitimate worries about the Windows OS.

Re:I hate new features.

[ShieldW0lf]

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:I hate new features.

[Allador]

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. :)

Re:Blackhole Avoidance?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

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 downstream router and blackholing other traffic you could end up causing a lot of stress on the system.

The point is, if MS has enabled some wacky routing features by default it may well cause problems for people using blackhole routing as a tool to overcome the problems created by the glut of MS's easily compromised systems.

Halo 2?

[charlieo88]

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?

Re:What "massive rewrite"?

[suv4x4]

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.

%$^^&, i hope not

[someone1234]

I need only DX10, but that is definitely not in the package. So M$, screw your SP.

Re:Windows 2000 troll, sorry, user

[Anonymous Coward]

I moved over to FreeBSD + KDE and Mac OS X quite a while ago now but I still have Windows 2000 on one desktop and in a VM on my MacBook Pro for apps that won't play with WINE. I find it funny that people are saying that there's nothing Windows Vista does better or new compared to XP that would make them upgrade, I still think that about 2000 versus XP.

I just wanted to comment on this part. Until mid this year, I swore by my old copy of Win2k Pro. I do a lot of gaming on a semi-older machine, so keeping a lot of bloat off of my system is important to me; add in the fact that I just don't have the time to learn a new OS (I just don't want to spend my Christmas vacation slumped over my computer learning it) and you can see why I thought that staying with the older, less 'pretty' and more down-to-Earth Windows 2000 seemed like the best option.

One day, I tried to Supreme Commander and found that it wouldn't work on my system. Why? The developer didn't support Windows 2000. Period. I had been waiting so long for that game I broke down, got a copy of Windows XP Pro, and grudgingly installed it.

I've never thought about going back, since.

Without any bias, I can say that installing Windows XP for my computer was the best thing I had done for it in half a year. My games improved their performance--from fixing little bugs to just running smoother. My system crashes less (no, no... really) and is more stable all-around. I have so many fewer problems now because I moved to current standard. And the bloat I was worried about? 10 minutes of disabling and uninstalling "features" removed the garbage. So many Windows users moved on to XP that 2k Pro seems to be the older, backward relative that can do a lot of the same things, but breaks a hip when trying to play Unreal with the younger operating systems at the LAN party.

So, I'm not suggesting you drop the FreeBSD + KDE and Mac, but I do strongly suggest you move your Win2k Pro system over to XP Pro, just for the sake of making the box more effective. Believe me... it was like getting a new computer. At this rate, I'll likely be using XP until they do something Very Bad to force me off and really learn Linux.