Do XP Service packs help?

monroeski · February 1st, 2003, 09:58 AM

I'm running XP Pro right now, and I've heard there are many people who don't like the service packs, but I wasn't sure if that was speed-related or some other feature of them. Just so you know...

-Athlon XP 2000+ (only at 100 fsb right now, long story, but I'll have that up to where it should be soon)
-Abit Siluro GF4 ti4200 64 MB DDR
-512 MB pc2700
-SB Audigy OEM
-Lite-on 48*24*48 cd-rw drive

I'm getting I think about 7500-7600 right now. I got some new vid card drivers, the 40. somethings I think, a few months ago and it brought me up to 8200, but Freedom Force wouldn't work right with those drivers which is practically HERESY in this house. I'm going to have access to a broadband connection later today, so I'll probably d/l the service packs and the new 41.09 drivers, and anything else you guys say might be helpful. Anyone have experience with Omega drivers?

::edit:: forgot to mention that I'm using just the pack-in drivers that came with the card when I got it last June, though I'm not sure what they are exactly.

That didn't really help did it. ::/edit::

goldenbuddha · February 11th, 2003, 09:00 AM

I am religious about service packs... by the pure virtue of the fact that they fix problems inherent in all windows versions. As well as security issues. I believe there has never been a "bad" service pack released by MS, correct me if I am wrong.

XP Service Pack 1 also adds a few nice features, like the ability to turn off MSN Messenger and a few other apps.

Of course if you have a pirated version with a select few serial numbers, you won't be able to patch it.

February 11th, 2003, 09:41 AM

SP1 works without any problems.

**Martoch** · February 11th, 2003, 09:50 AM

I'm also religious when it comes to the service packs...they handle the many security issues/vulnerabilities that are discovered.

Also, super hacker Kevin Mitnick says that the easiest people to hack are the ones who don't install the latest service packs.

AFAIK, there has never been a "bad" service pack...I've installed every one of them on 40+ machines and have never had a single issue related to the updates.

Hopper · February 11th, 2003, 09:52 AM

I installed SP1 via windows update and had no probs...

but as I stated in a post here recently, my problem was a lock-up right at the start screen... after I dl'ed some critical updates. I don't know why that happened either. I had to reinstall from scratch. So, I did SP1 again, but I'm afraid to install the critical updates.

Are those scores 3DMark? I got a boost of 300 points when I updated my chipset drivers. Update them if ya haven't done so already.

pickel · March 4th, 2003, 10:37 PM

Too many horror stories for me. XP runs fine without it. At least for me.

PresterJohn · March 4th, 2003, 10:42 PM

installing sp's are highly advisable. however, if you are doing this on a critical machine i strongly recommended that you have it backup and that you install the sp with the archive function turned on.

i have seen a few cases of bsod's that happened after installing a sp (w2k & nt).

muno · March 5th, 2003, 03:43 AM

I'm fundamentally against ms gathering information from my computer and sending it to them without my knowledge.

W2K SP3 and XP SP1 both state in eula that this will happen.
I refuse to install either of them.

I think XP SP1a has the same features as XP SP1 but without the 'hello mother, I'm home' feature. I think, but can't remember for sure.
-M

Nighthawk · March 5th, 2003, 04:36 AM

I thought SP1a was the same as SP1 but without the Microsoft JRE.

The only phoning-home I know of is if automatic updates are turned on, but they can be turned off..

Most of the people I've talked to who don't want to install SP1 don't want to because it does some not-so-nice things if you installed using a known warez CD-key.

muno · March 5th, 2003, 04:40 AM

You could be right about that.

If you know a little, you can change the cdkey to non banned one. The procedure takes about 1 minute... That's what I heard

-M