Service Pack 3 for Windows XP released

[cbscreative]

Well, it's been a while since WinXP has had a SP release, but I just received my notice and updated without incident. Anyone have experiences either good or bad with it? Maybe you have the wait and see approach. I do too with most upgrades, but SP releases usually contain important security fixes, so I tend to upgrade more quickly with these.

[billbenson]

I'm still using win 2k :)

[cbscreative]

2K is up to at least SP4 or 5 by now I think. Fortunately, most things will run on Win 2k though. I have one computer running 98SE, and I have very little running on it that's made after 2003 or 04 because support basically went bye-bye in 2003.

[billbenson]

Well, microsoft wants to obsolete both 2k and xp so you buy vista. Thats why I'm taking a good look at linux. 2k and xp are very similar with a different user interface. I never came up with a good reason to upgrade from one to the other. MS may be locked into 2k because of 2k server is used by so many companies still.

I have yet to run into something that doesn't run on 2k and does on xp except IE7. Oh Zune which is MS's ipod doesn't work with 2k either.

So they will try to force you to upgrade to Vista. I don't see them dropping SP's in the near future, but program computability seems to be a big strategy.

[Evan]

I don't mind Windows Vista, but it's not the greatest OS.

[cbscreative]

We're still at least 5 years away from seeing software not being compatible with XP. Hopefully by then the hardware will be strong enough to run Vista and the OS will work better. I intend to keep my XP Pro workhorse as long as possible. It's fast. And my Vista laptop with a lot more power is much slower.

[orion_joel]

I originally stayed away from XP until it hit Service Pack 2, which is kind of what i am considering for Vista, unless i upgrade my laptop and it comes preloaded.

Really what i have been able to determine is that the Service Pack is just really a roll upof all the security updates, since the last service pack. So i would assume that in reality if you maintain your computer updates through the Microsoft Update site, the Service packs should not really be needed, unless you re-install windows, then a service pack will take you up to date in a single update.

Although i still do not mind W2K i do prefer XP now i am more use to the interface, and a couple of things are placed differently that tend to confuse me slightly when i go from one to the other. I will have to look at doing the SP3 update soon i think as i have not been so good at keeping the updates happening.

[cbscreative]

The way I understand SP's are that they come out when there are a high volume of critical updates that would normally be released with regular security updates. I keep my computer set to update at least weekly. Normally it's a routine security patch (I only set mine for critical since upgrading everything just adds fluff. Today's update was SP3. which means an accumulation of critical secirity updates the way I understand the process.

According to what I was taught, these updates should be set to be done routinely for most users. If you're running a domain network, it's best to test the updates before implementing them across a netork. For most users though, the default updating is the best policy.

[orion_joel]

I totally agree Steve, these updates should be done on a regular basis for most users. I do tend to not update quiet as often as i should do, and more so with Service Packs. While at this point in time both my computers do automatically download updates, and generally install them when i restart the computer (can be anything up to a month, i restart very rarely).

For service packs i am a little more wary, as even though they will generally include all the updates that have already been done on my computer, there is i have found potential that they can cause unforeseen issues, with different software that you may have installed on the computer. So i try and leave it a week or two before installing and doing a little looking around to see if anyone else is discussing problems updating and what software the problems may relate to.

The above reason i use is also the same reason why network user's should test the updates before installing. For larger network's Microsoft actually has available a system that can be set-up locally to handle the deployment of updates for your own network, which acts like the windows update system, but allows you to only send through updates as you know they will work with your system. It is a good idea but only really worth the time to set up for large networks.