Why SP2 deserved every shred of the scrutiny

[the hunter]

Note, I wasnt sure if this was deserving of being posted as news, but also felt it was too interesting to pass up. End of comments.


COMMENTARY -- Within the technology industry, there are such fervent supporters on both sides of many polarizing issues that you'd think these issues are religious rather than technological. Linux vs. Windows, AMD vs. Intel, PC vs. the Mac, proprietary vs. open source are a few examples. But Microsoft's Service Pack 2 for Windows XP?!

Since its arrival, SP2 has been under the equivalent of an electron microscope. It doesn't seem to matter whether a post-SP2 installation problem (notice that I didn't say "SP2-caused?") is a showstopper or a pixel out of place. Every problem, no matter how big or small, is apparently worthy of its own headline. Forums such as the comments on ZDNet's blogs and the TalkBacks on ZDNet's news stories have attracted armchair SP2 critics, many with their own SP2 horror stories, as well as Microsoft supporters who've not only had success with SP2, but who've risen to the company's defense and characterized the negative attention as unfair, overblown, sour-grapes, and even vendettas.

In a posting that castigated me, ZDNet, and users who have voiced dissatisfaction with SP2, one ZDNet reader identifying himself as Peter wrote, "OK, David Berlind and friends, just let it go. Your anti-MS crusade is really getting tired now. You and your type must hate being into computers, as you seem to hate Microsoft so much that you can't go one day without spouting some anti-Microsoft drivel. Your last few anti-MS SP2 FUD articles brought this clearly to the front." Peter wasn't alone in this sentiment. Referring to an opinion piece by Steve Jamison ("Reader rails against 'obscene' costs of MS insecurity"), another reader posted: "I cannot believe ZDNet allows this drivel. This is an obscene post. We look to ZDNet as a beacon of light in IT journalism. Posting this perverse opinion is immoral. Microsoft is the guiding force in security. As Steve Ballmer said, SP2 for Windows XP is wowing customers. My local MCSE user group cannot stop praising the advances SP2 has made in security."

Full article here:http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-5344180.html

[RipperRoo]

Microsoft is the guiding force in security.

i agree with that, microsoft is a guide - you pay em lots of money and they lead you round in circles; sounds like a guide to me

[gbread49]

I tend to disagree that "Microsoft is the guiding force in security" based upon their past track record.

If they were so interested in security, then why all the patches and fixes to plug security flaws. Why weren't those flaws identified by the MS programmers earlier.

Also, in most cases it is a 3rd party that has identified a security flaw or exploit in a MS OS or application, rather than MS itself. Then, with a little luck, MS will "try" to fix it, when they get around to it.

[the hunter]

I kind of figured this article would get a rise out of a few people.

[greffov]

I refrain from any comments...

[RipperRoo]

Originally posted by greffov
I refrain from any comments...

if you havnt anything good to say - dont say anything?

[the hunter]

If I posted my comments you guys would have to ban me.

[thornyone]

hows this

[RipperRoo]

Thats a T'Shirt that's waiting to be printed

[the hunter]

Well the boss was looking for new theme for this place, wasnt he? ROTFL

[greffov]

lol