I found this quite interesting and thought to share it here with everyone. I also wonder if all the IT guys know something that we should know..I mean there *IS a reason they have opted not to install SP2, isnt that odd?..LoL
But apparently MS will give us little choice in the end.

Zero.
********************************

AssetMetrix has added a service called Update Policy Manager to its AssetIntelligence framework. With the new feature, IT managers have the ability to enforce corporate policy for updates via Microsoft's Automatic Update service on all PCs within their organizations, without the requirement for Microsoft's Active Directory or SMS.

The company says Update Policy Manager is being launched as the market prepares for 12 April, the date Microsoft has said its Automatic Update service will deliver Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2), as much as a 266Mb upgrade, to Windows XP-based PCs. In August 2004 Microsoft responded to customer demands to optionally suspend SP2 delivery via their Automatic Update service for a period of eight months. That suspension expires 12 April.

AssetMetrix Research Labs, the research arm of AssetMetrix, has also announced the results of a study into the level of SP2 penetration in the IT environments of 251 North American corporations, consisting of over 136,000 PCs. The analysis found that only 24% of Windows XP PCs surveyed had upgraded to SP2.

"Microsoft allowed a significant period of time to accommodate companies' demand to test and validate Windows XP SP2 within their IT infrastructure," said Steve O'Halloran, managing director of AssetMetrix Research Labs. "Based on our research, a substantial number of companies have yet to decide whether to accept or embargo Windows XP SP2. To date, we have observed that 40% of companies using Windows XP have actively avoided upgrading to SP2, and only 7% have actively accepted it. The other 52% of the companies showed no direction or policy towards SP2, and may find themselves having support issues by allowing multiple editions of Windows XP to exist in their infrastructure."

Companies choosing not to deploy SP2 will be faced with a host of potential issues, including possible incompatibilities with future products such as Internet Explorer 7, or a potential support gap when Microsoft support for Windows XP Service Pack 1 is withdrawn in September 2006.

Comments
on Apr 15, 2005

So many people seem to think SP2 is the spawn of the devil.

Jafo had exactly ZERO issues with it...

on Apr 15, 2005
It's a pain in the rear to do that many updates to start with.

Then you have machines running proprietary software that you can't run Windows updates on until the vendor has tested the service packs to see what it may break in their software.

I have some machines running Windows 2000 Pro and Server, that I only recently got the full go-ahead to install Service Pack 4 on. due to issues with it breaking some services necessary for the software to do what it is supposed to do.

I think we have probably anywhere from 50 to 70 machines running XP. Some have been updaed to SP2, but frankly that's a lot of time to spend even with network installs and all. Many of those boxes aren't supposed to have web access anyway, so why bother? (of course svery so often someone gets around the security, and then you have an unpatched machine on the web. Usually ends up reformatted and reinstalled rather than pull your hair out cleaning up the mess.)

Anyway, that was just some of my personal opinion on why SP2 hasn't had wider corporate implementation. Personally, on my home PC I've had just as much trouble as Jafo. Zero.
on Apr 16, 2005
I've had many a problem with SP2. The biggest one being SP2 will slow my computer down to a crawl. This even happens after a fresh install of XP and all my drivers.

Suffice it to say I would rather run my PC without ANY updates than use SP2 if MS windows updates gets to the point that I can't have ANY updates without SP2 installed.
on Apr 16, 2005
As you know Zero, I too have had no issues with SP2. I don't think MS was "hiding" anything from the consumer, the reason that the corporate IT departments haven't rolled it out is because of legacy software and such - which I am sure you are aware. For the consumer this would generally not be an issue and there would be no reason for a consumer to test each individual update to ensure that it runs on their computer.

I have been thinking about why some people may be having issues with SP2 - it could have to do with whether or not their machines are actually WinXP approved - meaning the hardware, mobo, etc. I know that I did have a problem on one machine, but that was totally on me trying to use a machine that in no way shape or form met the min requirements to run WinXP.

I know, I know....you as a consumer should be able to "customize" your computer the way you want to and use the OS of your choice and I agree that MS does do a bit of corraling when it comes to custom PCs, but for the most part if a machine is put together with high-end stuff then there is generally no problem. I still feel that the people having issues with SP2 in a non-corporate environment is a minority and will boil down to machine specs and end-user errors.

Those problems in a corporate environment are related to legacy software as was already pointed out. Instead of jumping on Microsoft to go backwards in the improvement of their OS, personally I think the corporations need to jump on their software vendors and tell them to get in the game - it is the 21st century and not 1989, their software should reflect the fact as well. If they don't improve their product then a different vendor should be chosen. Yes I know all about the costs involved - but what is more expensive: the cost of running up to date compliant software, or the cost of man hours needed by the IT department to repair machines and ensure that any update released is compatible before installing it....If I were an ISV I would make damn sure that my software was up to date and compatible with the most dominant computing environment in the consumer and corporate markets - well that is if I was interested in my customers and actually cared about their success...

Raymond
on Apr 16, 2005
So many people seem to think SP2 is the spawn of the devil.


It is, after all it does come to us directly from the "Evil Empire"..now doesnt it?...LoL..J/K

::waves:: Hi Raymond!, I knew if I used the right "bait" I would catch a "DevTekPro"..LoL..J/K

I simply thought it was quite an interesting article and worth sharing, 3/4 of the corporate computing world is quite a large number you must admit.
As for myself, I'll wait until I absolutely have to upgrade in order to use all the new "goodies" that are attached. I have no reason to install the SP at the moment and as I have explained in other threads, it may take a little effort in my case to get it all working correctly..::laughs::

Anyway, I am straight out of bed at the moment and I NEED my coffee..LoL...

Take care,
Zero.
on Apr 16, 2005
Jafo had exactly ZERO issues with it..


Meowy had exactly ZERO issues with it...
on Apr 16, 2005
I simply thought it was quite an interesting article and worth sharing, 3/4 of the corporate computing world is quite a large number you must admit.


I agree the number is high. However, I stand by the fact that it is the ISV's responsibility to make sure their software remains up to date and they ensure that their customers have easy access to those updates; this goes for the OEM's and hardware vendors as well. Additionally, in the corporate environment, often times the hardware and software is not standardized across the company which causes issues for compatibility and upgrades: I read a nice little article in InfoWorld this week, Link that could shed some insight to the underlying problem.

Everyone wants Microsoft to improve the OS, fix those dang bugs, etc etc. Yet when they release an update which addresses these issues but is not compatible with older, less secure hardware and software the same thing is said again: improve the OS, fix those dang bugs, etc etc.... seems like a pattern to me and the patern lies with the End-User not with the OS

People have got to start realizing today's computing environment requires better equiptment as well not just an improved OS.

Raymond
on Apr 17, 2005
Jafo had exactly ZERO issues with it..


Meowy had exactly ZERO issues with it...


Chris TH has had exactly ZERO issues with it...


Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
on Apr 27, 2005
To imporve on security, XP2 had a lot of drastic changes to NTFS. One of the most obvious was setting cluster sizes. With XP & SP1, users and admins could get drives initialized with a wide range of cluster sizes, now they are limited to one size fits all. In effect, if you drive had differetn cluster size, your machine would not boot after the update.
This is only one issue.
Another is the fact that many corporate environments run other network operating systems and i know that Novel for example never plays nice immediately after a major (or minor) Microsoft patch. Compounded, that's your other 75%........
on Apr 28, 2005

All our PCs with XP have SP2 and all have zero issues.

However, that's still only 25% - the other 75% are Win98...

on Apr 28, 2005
Jafo had exactly ZERO issues with it..


Meowy had exactly ZERO issues with it...


Chris TH has had exactly ZERO issues with it...


Aaron has a TabletPC and SP2 actually improved the functionality. So I had ZERO negative issues and at least two positive issues.


Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central