ET Warrior Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Well a local newspaper ran an ad about a study conducted by an indepentant company in Louisville, CO, where they tested the vulnerability of computers left on the internet unprotected, and it looks like if you don't want to update to Service Pack 2 you'd better be confident in your firewall and anti-virus software. link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_hill987 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 It's true, i went on the internet without it and got msblast and sasser within seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IG-64 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I installed SP2 as soon as I saw it existed, before all the "talk" about it. I've been updating it just to get the little updater popups out of my way. I don't use the firewall because it interrupts me every 5 seconds to ask me if I want to let dust through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Service pack 2 messes with your inbound/outbound connections. Screw that. I'm fine without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LightNinja Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Originally posted by InsaneSith Service pack 2 messes with your inbound/outbound connections. Screw that. I'm fine without it. yep, i installed it and it messed up some things of my pc so i just uninstaled it and choosed manual instalation at windows update Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jed Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Still running without it, and I'm fine. Virus scan shows nothing, spyware is zero (VIVA EL FIREFOX), and I'm happy as a clam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Some people are more prone to attacks with SP2. I can't remember why, but I remember reading a lot about it. Anyway, I've never had a virus, so I think what I've been doing works just fine without having to screw up my computer and connection settings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 I had been doing the whole windows update thing with all those annoying hotfixes, then got sp2. It messed with my firewire port amonst other things, and really slowe down start time. I restored my compy to 'out of box' specs using my recovery cd(xp pro sp1). I also did this *uninstalled int explorer(which actually doesnt get rid of it !) *installed firefox(damn you FF nazis!) *installed NIS 2k5 *Installed spybot and ad aware *Installed tweak reg cleaner *Installed all games/apps/files on an external mini 80 gb HDD drive(I have a laptop) *turned winupdate OFF Now, my compy starts in just over 10 secs, no more lengthy bootup ! amazing yes, and no probs with viruses etc upon weekly checks sp2 = bollocks I say mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTV2 Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 Norton seems trust worthy enough. SP2 is better than not having anything, but isn't better then other products on the market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joetheeskimo Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 Originally posted by Jed Still running without it, and I'm fine. Virus scan shows nothing, spyware is zero (VIVA EL FIREFOX), and I'm happy as a clam. Originally posted by InsaneSith Service pack 2 messes with your inbound/outbound connections. Screw that. I'm fine without it. I think you get the idea, I'm fine over here without it, and I heard rumors about it being a little bit more tight-necked (involving some features that will be in Longhorn) about your software...I dunno. I'm sticking with SP1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 Haven't had any problems with it on either PC I own, or any of the other PC's that I have helped install it on. To me it's a bit of a non-issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GothiX Posted March 3, 2005 Share Posted March 3, 2005 SP2 screws up Norton 2004. So much for security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 Originally posted by MTV2 SP2 is better than not having anything, but isn't better then other products on the market SP2 isn't a security product, its just an update. It isn't supposed to make your computer as secure as somethingrunning security suites, it is just meant to plug the biggest vunerabilities... Just as you would be open to attack if you ran an unpatched, out of date linux box, you are vunnerable if you run an unpatched, out of date windows one. Of course, the security suites may well protect such a box, but for unprotected boxes SP2 is much better than just SP1. Of course, even with SP2 you should probably still have spyware, virus, trojan scanners and firewalls (and firefox). Still, its a lot better than nothing. It doesn't mess up ports, it just closes a lot of them by default (meaning that you need to reopen than if you need them). This is how it should have been from the start. Its fine. Not great, but fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rad Blackrose Posted March 4, 2005 Share Posted March 4, 2005 I installed SP2 and uninstalled it five minutes later. I had apps that had conflicts with SP2, settings that were hosed and a drop in computer performance. SP1 will be staying on this machine. I've taken similar steps to Astrotoy and I have not had a single problem. It all boils down to how smart you are when you are using your computer. SP2 is not idiot-proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.