Windows XP SP3 Released To Manufacturing

mike_diack was one of many readers to send word that Windows XP SP3 been released to manufacturing. It will be available to OEMs and enterprise customers on April 29. Here is a summary of features and changes. The company will wait till "early summer" to enable SP3 downloads through Automatic Updates.

Umm...

[calebt3]

Isn't it kinda late to be releasing to manufactures? How much more will they be able to use it?

So much service!

[Fluffeh]

While I love the fact that my OS is being helped along and that they are keeping it up to date, I am still a little annoyed that the "follow up" OS is really still about as useful as a bucket full of random sized bolts.

Though I love gaming, each month seems to bring me closer and closer to blowing away all three of my windows boxes and replacing them with a distro of Ubuntu or something similar. My lack of knowledge is the one thing keeping that at bay for now.

When will Microsoft simply get the fact that a flashy desktop DOES NOT COMPENSATE FOR A SHITTY OS.

So the bad guys will have MONTHS.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

It will be available to OEMs and enterprise customers on April 29. ... The company will wait till "early summer" to enable SP3 downloads through Automatic Updates.

So the bad guys, who can automatically generate exploits from updates in minutes [slashdot.org] will have MONTHS to generate and deploy their malware.

Good job, Microsoft!

Re:Added "Features"

[CannonballHead]

Unless it smells bad simply by association. "It's from MS, it must smell bad, therefore it must have something sneaky." Not necessarily good logic.

Re:So much service!

[Bandman]

Wanna bet on whether or not it "accidently" breaks enough machines to convince people to upgrade?

Re:So the bad guys will have MONTHS.

[afidel]

WTF? Why do MSDN and VL customers get this later than Windows Update? What exactly are we paying for?

Re:RTM?

[The Second Horseman]

You're not really the customer for this if you're thinking retail. Sure, it's a patch set for end-users, but the main target is corporate / volume license customers (for example, higher ed) customers who want updated media, drivers, etc. and don't want to move to Vista yet. They're still going to be able to get and use XP (downgrade rights) via their license agreement, and many will probably use XP for another couple of years.

MS: "Our customers are our beta testers."

[Futurepower(R)]

Don't get too excited. Remember the Microsoft motto: "Our customers are our beta testers." Remember that Microsoft is the Chief of Grief -- Let someone else have the pain. Wait until the bugs are found; SP3 version 3 may be the one you want.

Windows XP was first released in 2001. Windows XP created severe problems for us until SP2 was released in 2004 [microsoft.com].

So, Windows XP gave us 3 years of misery and 3 years of relative usefulness, but with extreme vulnerability to malware. And now Microsoft has declared the death of Windows XP in June 2008.

Is it any wonder why people don't want Windows Vista?

An indication of the hassle people had with downloading 3 years of updates is this quote from Paul Thurrott, who is over-the-top pro-Microsoft, and who often apologizes for Microsoft's abusiveness in a way that tries to make abusive behavior sound less destructive: ... the 100+ updates that Microsoft has shipped since SP2 can be a nightmare to deploy. [winsupersite.com]

My opinion is that Microsoft is very badly managed. Windows XP gave us 50% big hassles and 50% mild hassles. Do you want to partner with a company that has so frequently abused you in the past?

Six months then.

[downundarob]

Early Summer!

So somewhere around December then?

Update Rollups every 6 months please!

[ScottCooperDotNet]

As someone who's had to build many a Windows XP system since SP2 came out, it would be very handy if Microsoft offered a single file (similar to Windows 2000's Update Rollup) that has all patches since the last service pack. It would save me (or my company) time, and would save Microsoft on bandwidth.

I'm aware there are third party ways to update fresh builds of XP in a more straightforward fashion (or integrate the updates in to the install disc), but where is mighty Microsoft on this? Where is the value here?

Re:WGA?

[i.of.the.storm]

Considering SP2 did (IIRC) I would assume so.

Re:MS: "Our customers are our beta testers."

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows 2000 was the last even slightly useful OS released from MS. As of XP with the activation shit all you get is trouble. I'm a developer and constantly change hardware configs or reinstall. The activation crap pisses me off to no end. I hate having to call Microsoft just because I added a stick of RAM or had to replace a dead hard-drive. Fucking bastards.

Re:So the bad guys will have MONTHS.

[QuantumRiff]

Your missing one of the best reasons for SP3. I just installed a fresh copy of XPSP2 on a new model of computer to get the images ready. 110 MS patches later, it was caught up! Thank god for Windows Software Update Services or I would have had to download them all from Microsoft. Would have taken all day!

Re:So much service! - Broadcom does work

[Perseid]

We go from:

Ubuntu most of the time requires no specific knowledge. Start the live cd, double click the install icon and click next. Wait fifteen minutes and you have a stable system.

to

No, this commment would classify you as a bit of a n00b. You still using Ubuntu? You can get broadcom cards to work using firmware from linuxwireless + the b43 kernel module. I personally prefer to just compile the Zen Kernel from git (not to be confused with Xen). It's bleeding edge and fast. http://waninkoko.info/?q=node/14 [waninkoko.info] Otherwise, just build the kernel module and get the firmware. I'm graduated from Kubuntu to Arch, and now am switching from Arch to Gentoo so I can have even more control and more speed.

*blink*

Re:MS: "Our customers are our beta testers."

[bigstrat2003]

And of course therefore if you yourself never had a single problem with it, then nobody else did.

No, it's highly likely that if I, in my rather typical computer use, didn't have any problems, that either this guy's problem is a) highly specific, and not representative of the quality of the OS, or b) made up.

Windows XP SP1 was not "a damn good OS" (nor any version of Windows for that matter, but leaving that aside). If it was, there would have been no need for SP2.

Well, every version of Windows since 2000 has been a damn good OS, but leaving that aside... your logic is laughable. The fact that an OS needs updates makes it poor? Well, guess that makes every OS bad, by your standards. "Perfect the first time" is a highly unreasonable standard.

Re:So much service!

[compro01]

why fat32? last time i checked, ntfs works just fine on ubuntu and ntfs is definetly more robust than fat32, in addition to doing away with that old annoying 4GB filesize limit.

Re:MS: "Our customers are our beta testers."

[Anonymous Coward]

What - your posting on /. about an OS, and you couldn't even get games to work on XPsp2? Cut me a break. The amount of FUD here is rediculous, especially comments like this. If SP2 broke your quake engine games, it was more likely pebkac, or some display driver rev... cause guess what... it worked fine for the rest of us who are capable of using a computer and reinstalling an OS...

Re:So much service!

[gnalre]

Very true. I've been using Vista since it was available on Newegg, and have had almost no problems (not none, but then again, it isn't like people have no problems in any OS). It works beautifully, people crying about Vista are either a) unfortunate in the fact that their hardware/app isn't supported (and this isn't the majority of the problems), or b) spreading FUD.

Hurrah for you. You have played Microsoft roulette and we have a winner!

The truth is I am sure Vista is fine for many people. I do assume Microsoft did some testing before release, however even with a brand new PC you just don't know how Vista will run. And why bother when you do know windows XP will run just fine,(and probably faster). Also if you look at what Vista gives you over XP, there is not a lot there to make it a must have upgrade especially with the afore mentioned risks associated with it.

If Vista didn't suck

[phorm]

If Vista didn't suck, you'd have no reason to complain...

That's a pretty big "if" right there. If Vista didn't suck, I'm sure some of the anti-MS zealots would still complain, but there would be a lot more of us (myself included) that would be willing to move off of XP.

As it is, the choices are:

a) XP: Doesn't run things like DX10, newer hardware, and support is being curtailed
b) Vista: Make powerful machines run like crud, and base-level machines cause you to reminisce fondly of your old 386. Extra, useless cruft. Familiar menus relocated for no apparent reason.
c) Alternate OS (Linux, etc) Learning curve (for some). Doesn't run all software that the above may run. Doesn't run all hardware. Less (but growing) industry support/recognition

None of these are exactly a perfect choice... I would have been happy with a Vista/Linux dual-boot if not for the suckitude of Vista.

Re:So much service!

[Fweeky]

download automatix and run it

No, please don't. It's buggy, it screws up updates, and it's been discontinued.