OT: WIN2K SP2 info

[imported_CyberWire]

LINK
Little off topic, but I'm sure that alot of ppl in here will be interested in some of the bugfixes.

 

[SilverBack]

Uh Dude,
You linked this page!

 

[sciencewhiz]

SilverBack,

Thats one of the features

 

[SilverBack]

LOL stop it!
It's way to early to be laughing!!

Hey theCool1, I would like the link though

 

[crYnOid]

well he hasn't linked to this page:Q it is linked to a page in the operating systems forum, which has the link to the site.

But for convenience here is the link for the lazy people, just click here

 

[Poof]

Thanks for the link crYn0id...

And can somebody tell me why M$ releases beta fixes????? I mean come on! The fix either works or it doesn't...it fixes the problem or doesn't (or at least tries to). Is this not an oxymoron or what to call a SP a beta??? :|

/me waits for SP4 and sits tight with her Linux

 

[ProZack]

The Links will no longer work. I work for a MS CTEC and was informed yesterday that the SP2 Beta was pulled due to bugs it had in it. So, I wouldn't advise using it unless you are having problems it directly addresses. Also, I would wait until releases (seen this b4), unless you LIKE testing the beta stuff...

Could lead to another opportunity to learn how to reinstall! HAHA

Just my 2cents,

Pz

 

[RaySun2Be]

Poof,
Releasing a Beta allows MS to have others test their "fixes" and thus hopefully speed up the process of getting problems resolved. A sort of distributed testing.

Isn't that one of the strengths of Linux, is that there are many many people working and testing and improving all the time, thus reducing the amount of time any one company would spend testing?

Plus, if people use it and find major problems, MS can just claim it was in beta testing, pull it, and re-release it later...Just like they have apparently done with Win2K SP2 :Q

 

[Viztech]

I became involved with M$ in testing a somewhat obscure problem with newer machines running Win95b, an OS that I use a lot. It is described in Q245583.

The fix has always worked for me without causing any additional problems, but cost me a tech support charge to get the hotfix to start with. I must say that I got my money's worth in tech support from M$, as they were very good to follow up and document my situation. It is from these experiences that M$ can learn if a fix indeed works, and should be incorporated in future SPs.

On the 2 occasions that I have used paid tech support from M$, I came away more than satisfied.

YMMV, do not pass GO!, do not collect $200, this is the opinion of viztech and not of this radio station....

 

[Poof]

RaySun2Be - there is a reason why the 2.4 Linux kernel is not "gold" yet, despite Linus Torvalds' promise to get it out either by the end of Nov. or beginning of Dec. of this year - which is NOW! (they were originally targetting last Feb. for release). If there's a problem, then they tend more to hold back from releasing then trying to meet some business model deadline. Perhaps people laugh at that thinking (NetBSD does the same type of "no code released before its time&quot, but at least it allows you to move on to adding new features rather than spending an inordinate amount of time trying to fix the existing code... which is why the company itself has bloated so...

The scary thing for me is the that we're not talking about an OS release from M$ being in beta - we're talking about a PATCH to the OS release!!! Why was SP1 almost 80MB in size????? Hell... My old 486 had an 80MB drive with Win 3.1 on DOS 5.0, WP51, Paradox 3.51, Quattro 1.0, the old MS encyclopedia, games galore, blah blah, with room to spare!

I know that there's been some talk from them about expanding the betas even more to try to match the open source "more eyes" paradigm but still... And what's scarier is Win ME - look at all the poor souls out there - the average joe's who come to me at work to moan about their brand new Gateway's at home with the broken ME on it...

And VizTech - I know that M$ support costs $250 - per incident I believe... It's a shame that you have to pay to fix a problem in their OS... I can see paying for support of that OS - eg., your own misconfiguration issues or getting it to work with your hardware/apps, but paying to fix bugs, and at that price, is a bit much...

Sorry guys for digressing, for this is truly Offtopic, but... sigh...

[EDIT: Did I put enough ""s in here or what? heh heh ]

 

[Possessed Freak]

ah but just think, now instead of getting an out of memory error in win3.1 you are getting a core dump... That is why it is 80mb in size, the added feature of attemptig to debug the problem, yes I use that feature all the time... random changes here and there, this é should really be a þ at this line... lets try it again.... ha ha I have located the bottleneck... it's this stinking רÅÆÄë~LÖ line that causing all the errors... see how useful the core dump is... now to test it this could take a while... wow who knew you can get a BSOD on a BSOD error... that is a coo feature.

 

[Poof]

LOL @Possessed Freak!