Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Upgrades Operating Systems Software Windows IT

Microsoft Quietly Releases Windows 2003 SP2 175

Posted by kdawson from the long-list dept.
Several readers noted that Microsoft has quietly released 32-bit Windows 2003 Service Pack 2 for download. (The 64-bit edition is still showing as a release candidate on the site.) The installation of SP2 may potentially regress hotfixes that have been deployed previously; Microsoft has released a script to scan for hotfixes that may potentially regress.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Quietly Releases Windows 2003 SP2 More

Microsoft Quietly Releases Windows 2003 SP2

Comments Filter:

  • Where is XP sp3? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Joe The Dragon ( 967727 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @07:28PM (#18341273)
    even just a update roll up would be nice. When you install a new xp sp2 system there is a lot of updates that you need to.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Izago909 ( 637084 )
      There are two good options. They don't have every last update for the various flavors of XP (home, pro, and media center) but they have the majority of them.

      Autopatcher [autopatcher.com] and Offline Updater [heise-security.co.uk]

      Both have options for 2000, XP, and 2003 Server

    • Re:Where is XP sp3? (Score:4, Funny)

      by Professor_UNIX ( 867045 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @09:07PM (#18342201)

      When you install a new xp sp2 system there is a lot of updates that you need to.
      You should start with a fresh install of Vista first, there are a lot less patches available right now so it will go quicker. :-)

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by el americano ( 799629 )
      I'm still waiting for SP5 for Windows 2000. I think I'm going to be waiting a long time.

    • XP will never see another service pack now that Vista is out. What incentive is there for MS to update old products?

  • XP x64 as well (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I fired up Windows Update on my XP Pro x64 rig today and it had a 350MB patch for me.

    Didn't seem to change much, if anything.

    • Didn't seem to change much, if anything.


      Microsoft is no longer planning to push out anything like Windows XP SP2, where there are vast changes to the OS during a Service Pack. You're actually seeing the ideal case right there, where nothing has gone wrong.
      • imo XP sp2 was really a new version of windows but they made it a service pack because the main area of improvement (security/malware resistance) was not something that most users would pay for but was something the lack of was getting them a lot of bad press for.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by baadger ( 764884 )
      Actually it did change one thing. The update for Windows Media Player 11 has disappeared off of Windows Update, but WMP 10 is still installed.

      Also if you look in Add/Remove Programs (and check Show Updates) you'll see all your hotfixes are gone. Interesting that IE7 is still a seperate installation and wasn't pushed out in this SP. I guess thats because they're only really thinking about 2003 Server. I wonder if IE7 will become irremoveable in x86 XP SP3?

      It's a service pack. It's what they should be, *minor

  • WPA2 Support (Score:4, Funny)

    by solevita ( 967690 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @07:32PM (#18341315)
    At long last! Finally we can un-wire all those unsightly server rooms and start providing data in the same style that we consume it. I for one welcome our new servers-in-beds overlords.
  • This being the intertubes and all, isn't this kind of old news? I am fairly certain our university upgraded their 2003 servers last week, even though the Microsoft published date reads 3/12/2007.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @07:42PM (#18341405)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Quietly? (Score:4, Funny)

    by AlHunt ( 982887 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @07:44PM (#18341417) Homepage Journal
    > Microsoft Quietly Releases Windows 2003 SP2

    Quietly releases?

    Posting it here certainly made it a lot noisier.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Amouth ( 879122 )
      i noticed it yesterday about 2pm while setting up a new virtual server.. really made my day - :-|

  • What made this release so "quiet"? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kestasjk ( 933987 ) * on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @07:50PM (#18341465) Homepage
    Some of you are asking what made this release so "quiet".

    What happened is in the black of night Ballmer, dressed in his ninja outfit, shimmied along the walls of the MS datacenter with a CD with this service pack on. He used his glass-cutters to silently sneak through a window, and snuck up into the vent before guards could see. Using a series of mirrors to deflect the trip-lasers he then lowered himself down from a vent grate, and uploaded the Windows 2003 service pack onto the server.

    Why was it released so quietly? Who knows, but I'm sure there's something evil at work here. Thanks to the submitter for pointing out that this release was suspiciously quiet.
    • He shall be remembered forever as the first ninja in history to squirt shurikens and throw chairs at targets.

    • Re:What made this release so "quiet"? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Speed Pour ( 1051122 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @09:01PM (#18342147)
      To answer that question is simple, it's a server platform. If they did an SP update for XP or Vista (gawd knows they should hurry given all the problems), it would show up on ever web page they have. Since win2k3 was never meant to go to an average consumer, it's just not worth advertising through most mediums.

      If that isn't a good enough answer, just look at the list of what's new...There's nothing of significant value, and all of the security/bug fixes are already addressed with regular critical updates. Who cares about this update? It's a 'value improvement' update at the very most.

      Now for my question...why was this made into a slashdot article? Judging by the number of comments so far, it's clearly not of much interest to anybody...and anybody who's running the os will receive a notification in the next few days anyway.
      • XP 64, which is a non-server edition of Windows 2003, was sold to consumer markets a little bit. Of course, the people using XP 64 are probably technically savvy and read about it on Slashdot.

        Microsoft released a simple, direct service pack today and it works well. It's about time they did that. My only complaint is the size: are there really 350 megabytes of binary diffs to apply?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by drsmithy ( 35869 )

          My only complaint is the size: are there really 350 megabytes of binary diffs to apply?

          The original release of Windows 2003 ? Almost certainly - that was ~3.5 years ago.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by StressedEd ( 308123 )
        ..it's just not worth advertising through most mediums.

        Perhaps that is why so few people were aware of the update, they don't posess psychic powers.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by afidel ( 530433 )
      The fact that the about 2003 SP2 page still linked to the RC2 page, or the fact that it wasn't all over the front page at microsoft.com

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Plug ( 14127 )
      It also went onto the download site several hours before the website was updated to show it was out of Release Candidate stage.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by professorfalcon ( 713985 )
      That's not how I heard it.

      What happened is that with the sun high in the sky and the wind at his back, Balmer, dressed in his pirate outfit, sailed his mighty ship through the walls of the MS datacenter with a CD with this service pack on it. He ordered parallel volleys across the bows of the blade servers from both the starboard and port sides of his mighty vessel. And of course, he made the guards walk the plank. After destroying the lasers and the grate with his hook arm, he uploaded the Windows 2003
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Now, where's XP Service Pack 3?? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ErichTheRed ( 39327 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @08:23PM (#18341803)
    Good to see Microsoft is still releasing service packs for Server 2003. However, I really want to see SP3 for XP. Building an XP box, even from SP2 media, requires over 75 patches in our environment! It takes nearly 50 minutes of cranking every time we have to build a new master disk image. Not all of us upgrade instantly.

    It's nice that Microsoft makes the patches available separately. For those who don't do it, you wouldn't believe how much work it is testing patches and narrowing down which one broke an application. However, I think they should have one monster rollup available at least every few months. Most of that 50 minutes is spent dependency-resolving, isolating and backing up the files that each patch replaces. Doing that once is better than 75 times.

    One thing I don't like about MS is that they tend to abandon customers who can't or won't upgrade to the next version of a product. I'd love to be on IE7, but we're stuck on 6 until several dependencies get fixed. I'm not too wild about Vista, but know that we have to go that way in the next year or so just to ensure we get the latest security fixes. Microsoft guarantees they'll backport fixes for a while, but you can bet they're doing all the active research on Vista. I can't agree with people who say they should still support NT, but most of the enterprise-class vendors have a much more lenient upgrade policy. (OpenVMS is at least kind of supported 3 versions back, IIRC.)

    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      learn to slipstream moron, you can take this 50 minutes to learn and make a custom cd, instead of bitching and being proud of it in slashdot.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It takes nearly 50 minutes of cranking every time

      they let you do that at work? in front of each computer?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by drsmithy ( 35869 )

      One thing I don't like about MS is that they tend to abandon customers who can't or won't upgrade to the next version of a product.

      Uh, compared to who ? Apple don't support OS X back more than 2 - 3 years (if that), most Linux distros won't go further back than $CURRENTVERSION-1 (12 months or so).

      Microsoft's support lifecycle - 5 years of mainstream support, 10 years of maintenance support - is one of the longer ones in the industry. Not really something they can be criticised particularly harshly abou

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by misleb ( 129952 )

      you wouldn't believe how much work it is testing patches and narrowing down which one broke an application.


      Oh I think I woudl believe it. Troubleshooting ANY problem on Windows makes me want to tear my hair out. There isn't a whole lot you can do once you've sacrificed your last chicken to the Win32 gods hoping that the next mouse click with be the one that, for no apparent reason, makes things start working again.

      -matthew
    • Building an XP box, even from SP2 media, requires over 75 patches in our environment.

      That's because you don't know what you're doing. You can set up a RIS server and slipstream the updates into your OS image or use nlite and build a custom install CD with all of the updates already there. Nlite also lets you integrate extra drivers and tweaks tons of settings, it's really nice.

      Get it at http://www.nliteos.com/ [nliteos.com]

  • I came, I saw, I... WTF????? (Score:5, Funny)

    by qzulla ( 600807 ) <qzilla@hotmail.com> on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @08:30PM (#18341851)
    15 hr 7 min on dial up

    Crap! I run my server on dial up. Guess this is going to be a long night.

    Thanks a LOT, /.

    qz

  • x64 Bit Version (Score:1, Interesting)

    by NoMoreFood ( 783406 )
    "(The 64-bit edition is still showing as a release candidate on the site.)"

    FYI: It may not be showing up on the site, but it's showing up on my wife's computer via Windows Update. (The Windows XP x64 version, at least).

  • Large patches are needed for some companies (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mlts ( 1038732 ) * on Tuesday March 13, 2007 @09:25PM (#18342333)
    A number of companies have applications which are only supported by the vendor at selected patchlevels, with no other software allowed. Microsoft releasing large collection of patches as service packs makes the job of vetting various hardware and software configurations easier. Its easier for a vendor to state that their application runs on Windows 2003 SP2, rather than Windows 2003, with a large amount of patch numbers needed.

    Plus, (IMHO of course), it was time for a service pack for Windows 2003 anyway.
  • ...but: Releasing an operating system quietly?

    Uh uh.

    It so happens that Apple released Mac OS X 10.4.9 today, and the updater didn't make a single sound while it was installing it. (Though the hard disk was making all kinds of thrashy sounds, but I don't think they count.)
  • Just installed Win2k3 on a server a couple hours ago. It was nice to see ~3 critical updates rather then the 50+ I had to install last week.

  • List of regressed hotfixes (Score:5, Informative)

    by DanMc ( 623041 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @08:03AM (#18345913)
    I analyzed the script and extracted the list of possible hotfix regressions. None of them appear to be standard hotfixes. None are installed as part of a WindowsUpdate or SP1. If you have these on your system, you probably installed them after searching the KB to solve a specific problem. Many of the updates do not have public KB articles or descriptions, so you'd have to have gotten the patch after being sent the patch from MSPSS. Here are the public hotfixes that are regressed:

    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/898073 [microsoft.com] = [IE6 crashes on] digest proxy authentication [to https sites] http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918005 [microsoft.com] = Battery power may drain more quickly [after unplugging or undocking] http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918837 [microsoft.com] = power management is turned off [after disabling WakeOnWirelessLAN] http://support.microsoft.com/kb/924078 [microsoft.com] = [error opening] Properties [...] for a network printer on [WinXP] http://support.microsoft.com/kb/924301 [microsoft.com] = AutoComplete feature [broken after following javascript link in IE6] http://support.microsoft.com/kb/925020 [microsoft.com] = [Lockup when using] USB device on a multiprocessor computer http://support.microsoft.com/kb/925240 [microsoft.com] = warning message [...] new password that does not meet the requirements http://support.microsoft.com/kb/925513 [microsoft.com] = Error code Winsock [...] "WSAECONNABORTED (10053)" http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926047 [microsoft.com] = [Misplaced] AutoComplete box [...] in Internet Explorer 6 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926132 [microsoft.com] = ...WMI does not clear event registrations when the corresponding sink... http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926754 [microsoft.com] = STOP: 0x000000D1 (parameter1 , 0x00000002, 0x00000000, 0xf27b4e8e) http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926940 [microsoft.com] = SQL Server 2000 Service Pack 4 stops responding http://support.microsoft.com/kb/927291 [microsoft.com] = Dfsutil /import" command takes a long time to finish http://support.microsoft.com/kb/927493 [microsoft.com] = Winsock programs may exhaust the system's non-paged pool http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929620 [microsoft.com] = increased paging to the hard disk when you run an SAP R/3

    These fixes are regressed, but they're not published on the public Knowledge Base:

    "919757" "925290" "926305" "926513" "926583" "927197" "927436" "927893" "928194" "929066" "929759" "930620" "933452"

  • [Un]Fortunately, when I was hit with this by surprise at work yesterday, it failed to install. Hooray Microsoft!
  • Hopefully this will be easier than installing SP1 to SBS (small Business) 2003. When I did SP1 on SBS 2003, MS's auto update killed the system to where it couldn't accept new users, etc. I had to manually install about 3 patches and 2 more versions of SP1 to get it working right. And that was all listed as what to do in a MS knowledge base article. Totally insane way for MS to have it update.

Slashdot Top Deals

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Close