Service Pack 2 For Windows XP Coming To A PC Near You [Archive]

Ed Hansberry

08-09-2004, 07:00 PM

The long awaited Service Pack 2 for Windows XP will be on your XP based PC soon. Beta testers and subscribers to MSDN may already have it. Microsoft will put it on the Windows Update site and push it out via Automatic Updates in the coming days and weeks. I mainly wanted to alert you to a few changes in SP2 that will apply to mobile device users that use ActiveSync. By default, XP now enables the "Windows Firewall" which replaces the anemic "Internet Connection Firewall" that came with XP in 2001. You will need to create two exceptions in the new Windows Firewall for ActiveSync, but XP should help you do this with relative ease. After your initial boot after SP2 has installed, a 24 minute install process on my 1.2GHz laptop and a nearly 5 minute boot as the install finished up, you'll be welcomed with the following dialog box: <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2004/20040809-firewallactivesync1.gif"><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2004/20040809-firewallactivesync1sm.gif" /></a> Figure 1: Tell XP to unblock the Connection Manager, which is an ActiveSync component. <!> When you initially dock your Pocket PC, you will then be welcomed by the dialog box in figure 2: <img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2004/20040809-firewallactivesync2.gif" /> Figure 2: Tell XP to unblock ActiveSync itself. If, for some reason, the new Windows Firewall doesn't prompt you, you can manually create exceptions by going into the XP control panel, select the Windows Firewall, select the Exceptions tab and select the following two applications: Connection Manager: C:\Program Files\Microsoft ActiveSync\wcescomm.exe ActiveSync: C:\Program Files\Microsoft ActiveSync\WCESMgr.exe Unless you really know what you are doing, you should enable the new Windows Firewall. It doesn't block file and printer sharing on local networks like many of us have at home like its predecessor did, and it is much more user friendly when it comes to blocking/unblocking and setting up exceptions. Even though I am behind a NAT router at home and have IP addresses that aren't accessible from the outside, I have chosen to enable the Windows Firewall as an extra measure of protection, something I didn't do with the old Internet Connection Firewall because of the problems it caused.

Bob S

08-09-2004, 07:08 PM

How will this new firewall interact with the one I am already running (Symantic). Should only one? Both be enabled?

Will they interfere with one another? :?:

brianchris

08-09-2004, 07:16 PM

Kati Compton

08-09-2004, 07:20 PM

brianchris

08-09-2004, 07:22 PM

Yay! I never liked that I had to mess with my XP firewall settings when trying to print TO a network printer. I can understand needing to specify exceptions on the computer HOSTING the printer. But *accessing* the printer?

Hooray. :)

Printing TO a network printer is solicited traffic....it should have been allowed back in through the "old" firewall if needed. Or perhaps I'm seriously confused :?

Kati Compton

08-09-2004, 07:29 PM

Printing TO a network printer is solicited traffic....it should have been allowed back in through the "old" firewall if needed. Or perhaps I'm seriously confused :?
If you're using the Windows network, you cannot. Because you can't really "get onto" that network if you have the firewall up. Using actual "Network" printing where there's an IP? Yes. But not the simple file-sharing printer-sharing that Windows likes you to do normally.

gorkon280

08-09-2004, 07:32 PM

Please don't flame me.

One thing I appreciated about the current (soon to be replaced) Windows XP firewall WAS its simplicity. It blocked unsolcitied traffic, period. Yes, it should have been activated by default, and yes it should have trusted file / printer shares on local networks, but other than that it was good.

One thing I personally HATE about third party software firewalls is every 24.8 seconds they're informing you some process on your machine is doing something and asking if it should be allowed. True, that's great if you've got a virus or trojan installed, but a Firewall should NOT be an anti-virus program (anti-virus programs should do that).

Obviously, most everyone else AND Microsoft disagree with me, becuase it looks like I'll have to approve every service running on my machine after I install SP2. DRAT.

Granted, I haven't actually used SP2's new firewall as I didn't beta test and am not an MSDN subscriber, so I can't get it yet. So, perhaps my opinion will change, but your (helpful) post is scaring me.

Trust me this is a good thing....BUT.....

I think that McAfee, Symantec and other firewalls need to let you be able to configure the ports that you have open manually and watchout for programs that try to access open ports (like say something other then a web browser accessing port 80). Also, for god's sakes, detect when upgrades happen and use the same settings. Also, the security needs tweaked a hari where you MUST login and you MUST provide a password to install things even if you are an admin user. Mac OS X is like this at least on the install part. But I feel for you having to answer the danged message every 5 minutes for a while especially if it's the same program or a related program.

SteveHoward999

08-09-2004, 07:37 PM

One thing I appreciated about the current (soon to be replaced) Windows XP firewall WAS its simplicity. It blocked unsolcitied traffic, period. Yes, it should have been activated by default, and yes it should have trusted file / printer shares on local networks, but other than that it was good.

One thing I personally HATE about third party software firewalls is every 24.8 seconds they're informing you some process on your machine is doing something and asking if it should be allowed. True, that's great if you've got a virus or trojan installed, but a Firewall should NOT be an anti-virus program (anti-virus programs should do that).

Obviously, most everyone else AND Microsoft disagree with me, becuase it looks like I'll have to approve every service running on my machine after I install SP2. DRAT.

The final release candidate has been in public beta for several weeks, and I installed it as soon as I discovered it. The firewall is not so bad as you make out ... but sure you will have to explicitly approve things. Which makes sense. It means you can prevent things like Solitaire and MineSweeper (!!!!!) connecting to the internet if you don't want them to.

You are not supposed to run the new firewall in conjunction with another, but I have been doing so without any apparent issues. To be honest, though, I installed the free 12 month 'trial' of EZ Firewall and EZ AntiVirus 'suggested' by the security panel. Both seem to work really well, and after a couple of days there were few Firewall prompts. You can also switch off notification of intrusin attempts btw.

Steve

Jason Dunn

08-09-2004, 07:37 PM

One thing I personally HATE about third party software firewalls is every 24.8 seconds they're informing you some process on your machine is doing something and asking if it should be allowed. True, that's great if you've got a virus or trojan installed, but a Firewall should NOT be an anti-virus program (anti-virus programs should do that).

I couldn't disagree more. :-) Outbound port connections are important to keep track of, because it's the first sign that you might have spyware on your computer. In every instance I've seen, and I trust the new XP firewall is the same way, you only have to approve each service ONCE. That's it - so the first few minutes might be irritating, but beyond that you won't see the firewall warning come up unless there's a new program that's asking to access the Internet. Knowledge is power, and knowing when certain programs access the Internet is an important thing I believe. :-)

Anti-virus programs catch viruses, not spyware/malware/dialers that do crazy things with your computer. I for one applaud this new direction from Microsoft with their Firewall. I hope it's better at allowing local computers on the same subnet to see each other though - I had huge problems with that with the 1.0 version of the firewall.

ignar

08-09-2004, 07:44 PM

I'm actually pretty happy when my Sygate firewall asking every so often. I understand it can be annoying, but I feel protected and I like the fact that I can examine network traffic I've never authorized before. Also the frequency of firewall interuption drops down quite a bit as I train it. The first couple days after the installation are the busiest time for me and the firewall software, but after that I am rarely asked for authorization.

dannyoneill

08-09-2004, 07:48 PM

Download the full distribution package here

http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/6/5/165b076b-aaa9-443d-84f0-73cf11fdcdf8/WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe

T-Will

08-09-2004, 07:49 PM

So is there any "legal" place to download SP2 from right now?

LOL, thanks dannyoneill, you posted just as I was posting this question... ;)

Wingnut

08-09-2004, 07:55 PM

Does anyone have an idea of what the final Bluetooth stack in SP2 includes? I have the install sitting on my desktop, but I'm worried I'll lose the features of my WIDCOMM stack.

ignar

08-09-2004, 07:58 PM

Download the full distribution package here

http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/6/5/165b076b-aaa9-443d-84f0-73cf11fdcdf8/WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe

The file is pretty big. About 266MB. Thanks for the link. Is this the final (non beta) version?

John Cody

08-09-2004, 08:03 PM

In every instance I've seen, and I trust the new XP firewall is the same way, you only have to approve each service ONCE.

The only problem that still exists is that many of the "component names" confuse most end user's. For example, Ed H. had to bring attention to the name "Connection Manager" as being an essential part of ActiveSync, because many users will probably not know this, and say "Block", and then wonder why activesync stopped working.

So, because of many instances that the firewall will pop-up an alert for a component name that very often may not easily be recoginzed as a essential component, users may often click "UNBLOCK" if the name sounds half-way official. Which defeats the whole purpose of the firewall prompts because any half-brained virus writer will not label his app "Tom's Backdoor Virus" which makes it easy for users to know to click "Block". Instead, they would name it something like "Internet Explorer HTML Renderer" which almost everyone would click "Unblock". And this false-naming is easily done because the "name" of the component is an unsecure resource string in the app's file, which there is no real way to confirm it as being accurate (short of limiting execution of only components that are digitally signed.)

dannyoneill

08-09-2004, 08:04 PM

Its the final full package, if you wait for windows update it updates a single pc and only download the components you need so its smaller.

use this link if you..

1. want it NOW!
2. want to install on many computers 0X

T-Will

08-09-2004, 08:07 PM

Now let's say you have a friend who's installed a copy of XP that might not be totally legit, does SP2 do a check for legitimacy when it installs?

Jonathan1

08-09-2004, 08:13 PM

Does anyone have a link to the non propaganda info on SP2? E.G. I know what features are included but I'm interested in seeing what additional security holes get patched and what if any, since PS2 is predominantly security related, bugs are being patched.

I've yet to stumble across a technet note on SP2 and such details.

I'm wondering what critical security patches could be rolled into this. I have a number of friends and relatives I would rather hold off on upgrading until there is a good certainty that SP2 isn't going to blow up their system. Something at this point I'm concerned with.

Edit: Never mind. Found it. Looks like there won't be any additional updates beyond those that have already been released which is a smart move on the part of MS. Since this is the case I think I'll hold off recommending people upgrade until the end of Sept at the earliest.

dannyoneill

08-09-2004, 08:13 PM

This 'friend'. :twisted:

Should be ok, if not you can prolly get a serial generator to 'fix' the issue soon enough.

rzanology

08-09-2004, 08:13 PM

no it doesnt. I think you should thank our friend up there for posting it. I did it early saturday. It works pretty good. I have a tablet, i am really impressed with what microsoft did. KUDOS!!!!

Steven Cedrone

08-09-2004, 08:15 PM

Any problems running this if I am currently running RC2?

Steve

dannyoneill

08-09-2004, 08:15 PM

ive got a bluetooth dongle in my Pc. whats the advice with that as its supposed to be native isnt it?

Jonathan1

08-09-2004, 08:17 PM

Any problems running this if I am currently running RC2?

Steve

I'd think you would want to back out of RC2 before installing the latest and greatest. Guess? MS probably didn't take RC testers into consideration when they created the installer for the SP.

brianchris

08-09-2004, 08:17 PM

brianchris

08-09-2004, 08:22 PM

In every instance I've seen, and I trust the new XP firewall is the same way, you only have to approve each service ONCE.

The only problem that still exists is that many of the "component names" confuse most end user's. For example, Ed H. had to bring attention to the name "Connection Manager" as being an essential part of ActiveSync, because many users will probably not know this, and say "Block", and then wonder why activesync stopped working.

So, because of many instances that the firewall will pop-up an alert for a component name that very often may not easily be recoginzed as a essential component, users may often click OK if the name sounds half-way official. Which defeats the whole purpose of the firewall prompts because any half-brained virus writer will not label his app "Tom's Backdoor Virus" which makes it easy for users to know to click "Block". Instead, they would name it something like "Internet Explorer HTML Renderer" which almost everyone would click "Unblock". And this false-naming is easily done because the "name" of the component is an unsecure resource string in the app's file, which there is no real way to confirm it as being accurate (short of limiting execution of only components that are digitally signed.)

Excellent points eloquently stated. This is part of what I was trying to state. Here, the firewall is only as good as the user, and in many cases, even the most advanced user can be tricked.

Unsolicited traffic is unsoliceted traffic, period.....no user intervention required.

dannyoneill

08-09-2004, 08:24 PM

link is further up,

and

http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/6/5/165b076b-aaa9-443d-84f0-73cf11fdcdf8/WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe

Jason Lee

08-09-2004, 09:04 PM

Does anyone have an idea of what the final Bluetooth stack in SP2 includes? I have the install sitting on my desktop, but I'm worried I'll lose the features of my WIDCOMM stack.

I have the D-Link USB bluetooth adapter. It used the widcomm stack and it still functions fine with SP2. Didn't change a thing. :)

Philip Colmer

08-09-2004, 09:10 PM

Outbound port connections are important to keep track of, because it's the first sign that you might have spyware on your computer. In every instance I've seen, and I trust the new XP firewall is the same way, you only have to approve each service ONCE. That's it - so the first few minutes might be irritating, but beyond that you won't see the firewall warning come up unless there's a new program that's asking to access the Internet.
Unfortunately, the firewall in XP SP2 does not block outbound connections.

The warning windows that are appearing are to restrict external access to software running on your computer that is willing to accept such connections.

These windows are still valid and useful because you might have a trojan on your PC and you don't want external sources being able to connect to that trojan. However, what the SP2 firewall will not stop is a virus on your PC sending email out.

So you still need to be careful out there, and maybe still think about spending money on a personal firewall.

--Philip

Jonathon Watkins

08-09-2004, 09:20 PM

So you still need to be careful out there, and maybe still think about spending money on a personal firewall.

Zonealarm (http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/home.jsp) is your friend!

Downloading SP2 now. Thanks for the link! :mrgreen:

brianchris

08-09-2004, 09:29 PM

You could install a virus / trojan AND not run current Anti-Virus. Yes, in that case, a Firewall that monitors outbound traffic would be helpful.

But why not just not install the virus / trojan in the first place AND/OR run a current Anti-Virus program. Same for Spyware....don't install AND/OR run a spyware program.

I'm obviously not grasping the benefit of outbound firewall monitoring.....it seems to be another layer of complexity that most users wouldn't begin to understand, and is redundant IF you're running Anti-virus & anti-spyware softare.

Janak Parekh

08-09-2004, 09:37 PM

Outbound port connections are important to keep track of, because it's the first sign that you might have spyware on your computer. In every instance I've seen, and I trust the new XP firewall is the same way, you only have to approve each service ONCE. That's it - so the first few minutes might be irritating, but beyond that you won't see the firewall warning come up unless there's a new program that's asking to access the Internet.
Unfortunately, the firewall in XP SP2 does not block outbound connections.
Right, so Jason's point is moot.

I believe Microsoft did this deliberately to avoid the flood of calls about outbound connections. I personally am very happy with this decision -- ZoneAlarm drove me nuts the last time I tried it, because of the huge number of programs I run on my computer.

By the way, I blocked both ActiveSync and the Connection Manager without problems, since I don't do LAN syncing as of this moment. If I want to change this, it's a trivial step to do so.

Kati - you shouldn't have to punch any holes open to do use network printers as long as you do it by IP address (or perhaps fully-qualified hostnames). The problem you're probably running into is name resolution issues on a NetBIOS network -- Windows typically uses broadcast name resolution, and that doesn't work without opening holes in a firewall.

--janak

ignar

08-09-2004, 09:43 PM

Note spyware is not the only type of programs that spy on your computer and send the information out. Many legit programs often call home with your personal information. Adobe comes to mind.

By the way, if the firewall on SP2 blocks only incoming traffics, I don't see the needs to use it. My D-link router can do that better.

Janak Parekh

08-09-2004, 09:51 PM

By the way, if the firewall on SP2 blocks only incoming traffics, I don't see the needs to use it. My D-link router can do that better.
If you're the only machine on your home LAN, you're largely correct. :) This is for more complicated LANs and the legion of people who plug directly into their cable modem/DSL provider.

--janak

JonMisurda

08-09-2004, 10:02 PM

Any problems running this if I am currently running RC2?

Steve

I just upgraded from RC2 and it seems fine.

Jon

Kati Compton

08-09-2004, 10:13 PM

Kati - you shouldn't have to punch any holes open to do use network printers as long as you do it by IP address (or perhaps fully-qualified hostnames). The problem you're probably running into is name resolution issues on a NetBIOS network -- Windows typically uses broadcast name resolution, and that doesn't work without opening holes in a firewall.
The problem is the Windows Network way of sharing printers, not IP. With IP it works. However, that would require a static IP, and last we tried that at home we had some crazy router issues. It hasn't been a big deal, as I've been remote desktopping into my laptop anyway from the computer that HAS the printer, and the Remote Desktop print passthrough works fine.

FortimirCE

08-09-2004, 10:25 PM

I've had SP2 for about a month.

It was really easy to get. All you had to do was when you went to Windows Update... change v4 in your address bar to v5... and it would automatically put you on the beta release.

I got the final version yesterday. I have a few programs, namely StyleXP, that doesn't work.

jkendrick

08-09-2004, 10:48 PM

I have upgraded 3 different computers from RC2 to the final with no problems. Word of advice- turn off your anti-virus software or it will be stopping the install to scan the individual CAB files in the SP2 install. It can easily double the install time. Just don't forget to turn it back on after.

If you have a Tablet PC and are still running SP1a then run, don't walk, to get SP2. The enhancements to the handwriting recognition are phenomenal.

atpcz

08-09-2004, 10:51 PM

I got the final version yesterday. I have a few programs, namely StyleXP, that doesn't work.

you need to re-patch your UXTHEME.dll file. theres a link on the front page of neowin ;)

EricMCarson

08-09-2004, 11:42 PM

Does anyone have an idea of what the final Bluetooth stack in SP2 includes? I have the install sitting on my desktop, but I'm worried I'll lose the features of my WIDCOMM stack.

The MS BT support is improved, but mostly for USB dongle or built-in devices. My HP/3Com BT PC Card is not supported and I had to reinstall the thing twice before XP SP2 would print to my BT printer. Also, if you have a non-supported BT host device, you don't get the nifty new MS Bluetooth Control Panel. Too bad, I was actually looking forward to an upgrade over the 3Com software.

Ed Hansberry

08-10-2004, 12:02 AM

Couple of things.

1. I am pretty sure I read that MS specifically allowed this SP to be applied on hacked copies of XP because many of the drones on the internet spewing emails, viruses and worms are hacked versions. By changing their policy for XP2, it will help stem the flow.
2. You can apply this on an RC, but I recommend against it for one reason. If you install on RCx, then later uninstall XP SP2, you are back to the RC candidate. If you install the RC and go back to Sp1, you can now install SP2, then have a way back to SP1 if you need.
3. The Windows Firewall is really good from what I can tell and has one HUGE advantage over third party firewalls. It is in place very early in the boot, before the NIC is initialized. The ICF in XP/XPSP1 could be breached between the time the NIC came on and network services started and the time the ICF service started. XP SP2 gets rid of that problem. I seriously doubt if third party firewalls get so deep into the boot process to allow that type of functionality. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/columns/cableguy/cg0104.mspx

dean_shan

08-10-2004, 12:17 AM

I'm glad I was able to get SP2 on CD (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/updates/sp2/cdorder/en_us/default.mspx) before Microsoft closed the orders down.

tthiel

08-10-2004, 12:44 AM

Buy a Mac! :):):)

dean_shan

08-10-2004, 01:24 AM

Buy a Mac! :):):)

Already got one. Macs are nice but you still need Windows.

Janak Parekh

08-10-2004, 01:30 AM

1. I am pretty sure I read that MS specifically allowed this SP to be applied on hacked copies of XP because many of the drones on the internet spewing emails, viruses and worms are hacked versions. By changing their policy for XP2, it will help stem the flow.
Yes -- SP2 can be applied to any machine that SP1 applied on. There are a few, very old corporate volume license keys that don't work.

3. The Windows Firewall is really good from what I can tell and has one HUGE advantage over third party firewalls. It is in place very early in the boot, before the NIC is initialized. The ICF in XP/XPSP1 could be breached between the time the NIC came on and network services started and the time the ICF service started. XP SP2 gets rid of that problem. I seriously doubt if third party firewalls get so deep into the boot process to allow that type of functionality.
I'd expect some do -- they just need an installable driver. If nothing else, I'm sure ISA Server 2004 (www.microsoft.com/isaserver) does -- in fact, if you kill its firewall service, the machine becomes utterly inaccessible, which is a good thing. :D That said, I don't know about personal firewalls -- ISA Server is strictly enterprise-grade and for Server 2000/2003. (It is very impressive for a Microsoft firewall, though. MS has finally been getting its act together, which is a great thing.)

Thanks for the link, btw. Good read. You know, ICF never gave me issues, it just was terribly inflexible. I guess my machine booted fast enough and was sufficiently patched.

--janak

David Prahl

08-10-2004, 02:17 AM

Darius Wey

08-10-2004, 02:56 AM

I've had SP2 since it first became available to beta testers and upgraded to each successive build ever since. Now that RTM is out, I'll give it a shot although there's a couple of things I might let you all know:

(1) The firewall is certainly improved but you may still benefit from another dedicated firewall package.
(2) The Security Center has issues with some AV and FW apps; you may have to disable its alerting system.
(3) SP2 has an issue with DivX. In some cases, it can cause explorer.exe to crash everytime you browse DivX files in Windows Explorer. Just a word of warning. This totally jacks me off!

Otherwise, SP2 is alright.

mhowie

08-10-2004, 02:58 AM

Couple of things.

3. The Windows Firewall is really good from what I can tell and has one HUGE advantage over third party firewalls. It is in place very early in the boot, before the NIC is initialized. The ICF in XP/XPSP1 could be breached between the time the NIC came on and network services started and the time the ICF service started. XP SP2 gets rid of that problem. I seriously doubt if third party firewalls get so deep into the boot process to allow that type of functionality.

So, would running ZoneAlarm be superfluous post-update?

Thanks,

Janak Parekh

08-10-2004, 03:24 AM

So, would running ZoneAlarm be superfluous post-update?
ZoneAlarm gives you the additional alert functionality of programs trying to establish outbound Internet connections. Windows Firewall does not. The analogue here is that it lets people whom you've let into the house do anything, it just makes it much more difficult for intruders to enter. If you've let a bad entity in, though (like running spyware), this is not going to help. While this is not a foolproof strategy, no one strategy is, and it's a bit more "hands off" than solutions like ZoneAlarm.

For me, it's enough, but I know several people who will likely not ditch ZoneAlarm because they want to know every outbound Internet access attempt. One note of warning if you keep ZoneAlarm: make sure you check Zone Labs' homepage in case they need to release compatibility updates for XP SP2.

In other news, I've now successfully applied XP SP2 to my home, work, and laptop machines without a hitch. :way to go: DJ Apod's points are salient, though, and thanks for the DivX tip. :D

David, the one you downloaded is not "final release". The final release/RTM version was compiled on 8/3 and released on Friday. The version string in the Winver dialog is "Version 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158 : Service Pack 2)".

--janak

Badandy

08-10-2004, 03:50 AM

These may be stupid questions, but

-Will the firewall conflict with my cool PC-Cillin Firewall? Can I turn the Windows one off?

-Will I lose any data on my computer on update? Lose any documents?

-

Ed Hansberry

08-10-2004, 04:01 AM

So, would running ZoneAlarm be superfluous post-update?
In addition to Janak's comments - you can disable Windows Firewall and run ZoneAlarm and the WF will *still* protect you until Zone Alarm is running. You can't disable the boot protection Windows Firewall gives. Even on my domain at work where the firewall is disabled via a policy, it is enabled until my machine is booted and gets the policy from the DC.

Darius Wey

08-10-2004, 04:56 AM

In other news, I've now successfully applied XP SP2 to my home, work, and laptop machines without a hitch. :way to go: DJ Apod's points are salient, though, and thanks for the DivX tip. :D

Thanks Janak. I've been trying to find a fix for the DivX issue for a while now (since the early builds of XP SP2). It seems as though it's a Microsoft issue and not one by the team at DivX. There is a fix for it if you use Roxio software which installs a separate DivX codec. You have to remove one of the files (I used to know which one it was, but have forgotten now). Unfortunately, the DivX bug can still occur for non-Roxio-ed machines (e.g. mine). So the fixes are not permanent ones and they don't work on all machines. I'll be trying out RTM tonight when I get home to see if it fixes it. I'll let you all know of any updates I find.

On to other stuff, for those wondering whether ZoneAlarm is worth installing... I decided to stick with my ZA software on my SP2 machine because the Windows Firewall, while a certain improvement over the XP and XP SP1, is still too basic. It has many more advanced functions now but lacks the power of third-party firewall applications. The choice is up to you, but if you favour better security in third-party apps over the basic-ness seen in many MS apps, I urge you to take the plunge and invest in that firewall for the well-being of your computer. 8)

juni

08-10-2004, 05:25 AM

In other words: If you have Norton Internet Security you can safely disable the new XP firewall and go about your business as usual, right?

Jonathan1

08-10-2004, 05:45 AM

Philip Colmer

08-10-2004, 09:01 AM

Unfortunately, the firewall in XP SP2 does not block outbound connections.
I believe Microsoft did this deliberately to avoid the flood of calls about outbound connections.
That is certainly a possibility. The reason I was given by Microsoft at one of their two-day security workshops was that they didn't want another clash with the DoJ. If they had incorporated a fully-fledged firewall, it would have been competing unfairly with the likes of ZoneAlarm.

At least this way, you get the benefit of WF from the moment you turn your PC on and, if you want a higher powered firewall like ZA, you can still add that on. Best of both worlds.

--Philip

Jereboam

08-10-2004, 09:16 AM

Another one for whose laptop SP2 worked flawlessly. I'm liking it so far, now if only I can get my poxy DVD drive to recognise discs.

J'bm

Andrew

08-10-2004, 09:57 AM

I havent had chance to try SP2 yet, Im still downloading it, but from what I remember XP SP1 had problems with DivX files and browsing etc, but I applied the two 'fixes' below to my test machine and it seemed to resolve it, so Ive been using it since. Hopefully it will help with your issue too, if Ive understood you correctly.

I dont take credit for these fixes btw, I found them ages ago while browsing on the internet, but I cant remember where I found them. I just hope that the person(s) who discovered them doesnt mind me posting it here.

avi/DivX files causing high cpu usage again with installation of XP SP1

To correct the misbehavior in Windows XP, remove the following registry key.

"HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{87D62D94-71B3-4b9a-9489-5FE6850DC73E}\InProcServer32"

This will prevent Explorer from loading shmedia.dll in response to file property queries on these files. This will not effect your ability to play files, get file attributes, or even view thumbnails.

Clicking AVI/DivX Files on explorer causing 100% CPU Usage

Well windows seem to have a REALLY big problem when it comes to reading AVI files. It seems that when you click on an AVI file in explorer, it'll try to read the entire AVI file to determine the width,height, etc. of the AVI file (this is displayed in the Properties window). Now the problem with Windows is that if you have a broken/not fully downloaded AVI file that doesnt contain this info, Windows will scan the entire AVI file trying to figure out all these properties which in the process will probably cause 100% CPU usage and heavy memory usage.

To solve this problem all you have to do is the following:

1. Open up regedit
2. Goto HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\SystemFileAssociations\.avi\shellex\PropertyHandler
3. Delete the "Default" value which should be "{87D62D94-71B3-4b9a-9489-5FE6850DC73E}"

Voila! Please not that this will no longer provide you with the windows properties displaying the AVI file information such as width, height, bitrate etc. But its a small price to pay for saving you resources.

NOTE: Please use caution when using regedit. Improper usage may cause windows to behave incorrectly. Also, I cannot be held responsible. Backup your registry first.

mrkablooey

08-10-2004, 11:07 AM

I downloaded XP SP2 a few weeks ago and have only noticed one negative aspect. Every once and a while my USB mouse isn't recognized and I need to re-insert it. Besides that the beefed up browser and security is a welcome helper.

I had a few weird things, including reduced performance :? I held my breath while I clicked "Uninstall" after a week of hoping it would get better. :| It did, once it was uninstalled.

PC Support is governed by the 3 R's - Reboot, Reimage, Replace...*

*saw that on Wormhole Creations site (http://www.wormholecreations.com.au/wc/megabbs/wormhole/index.asp)

Zensbikeshop

08-10-2004, 11:20 AM

If you don't use IE or Outlook Express is it worth installing SP2?

I use Firefox and Outllok.

Thanks

Andrew

08-10-2004, 12:40 PM

I got SP2 installed and just opened Nero 6 to burn some data to a DVD, on opening, a window popped up stating;

Nero - Burning Rom

Nero- Burning Rom has a known compatibility issue with this version of Windows.

I didnt find anything on the ahead site, and if I click continue, it still seems to run ok... anyone else get this?

Andrew

08-10-2004, 12:43 PM

Zen,
Its usually nearly always worth installing a service pack, mainly for the various hotfixes etc. Of course you can download the hotfixes individually and apply them if you want to know exactly whats on your machine, or have a problem that the service pack 'breaks' something, but mostly service packs tend to be good things as they plug holes in the system etc.

If youre not sure make a backup of your system and then try the service pack on it, or install the service pack and uninstall it afterwards if you dot want it. Id still recommend backing up first though.

Ed Hansberry

08-10-2004, 12:56 PM

Does anyone know if there is a hack, a tweak, or a group policy entry that can extend the nag screen to reboot after a patch install? I never had any gripes with SP2 RC’s other then this. Well that and the new WIFI upgrades were more then a little buggy at the time.

I just wish MS would stop bugging me to reboot every 5 minutes. I WILL reboot when I get a chance thank you very much. NOW STOP BUGGING ME!!!
I don't think MS is going to relent on this. Too many patches have been "applied" that weren't really applied because machines weren't rebooted and the owner forgot to later go and do it. MS is getting intentionally annoying about this kind of thing. By being nice and letting the user control the situation, we've had more PCs infected by viruses and worms in the past 24 months than ever before in history and the dollar cost has been substantial. Their customers (OEMs) demanded MS step up the warnings.

I agree with it. I apply when I am ready to reboot so I don't forget, and it won't bother me to have the OS remind me.

Ed Hansberry

08-10-2004, 12:58 PM

If you don't use IE or Outlook Express is it worth installing SP2?

I use Firefox and Outllok.

Thanks
Absolutely. Fixes go so far beyond OE/IE.

Darius Wey

08-10-2004, 01:46 PM

Darius Wey

08-10-2004, 01:51 PM

For those with Nero compatibility issues, you may have to upgrade to the latest version. I didn't have any issues because I usually keep my Nero updated whenever I can, but a friend of mine did have a compatibility issue and found that to resolve this issue, you should download the latest update from the Nero website.

I think the latest version available is 6.3.1.17.
Use this to update your current build and it should work fine in SP2.

Philip Colmer

08-10-2004, 02:13 PM

A word to anyone that is using ZoneAlarm. If you are using the free version, you might (or might not!) be aware that there was a new release on July 29th (version 5.1.011).

This version introduces compatibility with XP SP2 so I would advise upgrading to that release before installing SP2, just to avoid any potential nasties.

This has been a Public Service Announcement :D

--Philip

Janak Parekh

08-10-2004, 03:47 PM

If you don't use IE or Outlook Express is it worth installing SP2?

I use Firefox and Outllok.

Thanks
Absolutely. Fixes go so far beyond OE/IE.
That's a huge understatement. SP2 is basically a mini-reinstall of the entire OS. Microsoft went through every DLL, etc. with a fine-toothed comb to try and ferret out as many buffer overflows and other code-based vulnerabilities as possible. They've tweaked the operation of RPC, etc. to make it much more resistant to attack. This is basically such a major update that I'll probably force all my customers to upgrade their 2k boxes to XP.

--janak

Steven Cedrone

08-10-2004, 03:54 PM

Any problems running this if I am currently running RC2?

Steve

I just upgraded from RC2 and it seems fine.

Jon

I have upgraded 3 different computers from RC2 to the final with no problems. Word of advice- turn off your anti-virus software or it will be stopping the install to scan the individual CAB files in the SP2 install. It can easily double the install time. Just don't forget to turn it back on after.

If you have a Tablet PC and are still running SP1a then run, don't walk, to get SP2. The enhancements to the handwriting recognition are phenomenal.

Thanks guys!

Steve

scottseligman

08-10-2004, 04:49 PM

Figure 1: Tell XP to unblock the Connection Manager, which is an ActiveSync component. <!>

If, for some reason, the new Windows Firewall doesn't prompt you, you can manually create exceptions by going into the XP control panel, select the Windows Firewall, select the Exceptions tab and select the following two applications:

Connection Manager: C:\Program Files\Microsoft ActiveSync\wcescomm.exe
ActiveSync: C:\Program Files\Microsoft ActiveSync\WCESMgr.exe

Since the XP SP2 Firewall is only concerned with incoming connections, shouldn't you leave these applications blocked unless you want to connect your PPC to your computer over the LAN or Internet?

Personally, everything on my PC is blocked (including Connection Manager and ActiveSync) with no ill effects.

Janak Parekh

08-10-2004, 08:15 PM

For the network administrators amongst you, here's the LAN download.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en

It's huge, so for those of you who are consumers willing to wait, a much smaller version will be made available over Windows Update shortly. Man, this sort of brings back the days of downloading NT4SP3 over a 56K modem. :lol:

--janak

Godsongz

08-10-2004, 08:29 PM

woof! 272391 KB! hehee no wonder they're discouraging people from downloading it if you only need to update one or two machines

Godsongz

08-10-2004, 08:46 PM

Janak Parekh

08-10-2004, 09:04 PM

will this package work on Tablets?
Yes -- at least, my MSDN download did, which is similarly-sized. ;) It updates it to XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 ("Lonestar").

--janak

Ed Hansberry

08-10-2004, 09:43 PM

For the Network Installation Package...

Supported Operating Systems: Windows XP, Windows XP Home Edition , Windows XP Media Center Edition, Windows XP Professional Edition

will this package work on Tablets?
Yes. There is just one SP2 for XP. It works on XP Home, XP Pro, XP MCE (upgrades you to MCE 2004 if you have MCE 2002) and Tablet (upgrades you to Tablet 2005)

THat is why the file is so large.

Zensbikeshop

08-11-2004, 12:06 AM

If you don't use IE or Outlook Express is it worth installing SP2?

I use Firefox and Outllok.

Thanks
Absolutely. Fixes go so far beyond OE/IE.

Great - thanks.

MS page only talked about IE and OE - have no found details of other improvements including Bluetooth and WiFi.

Thanks again,

Darius Wey

08-11-2004, 01:48 AM

Hey guys and gals. Okay, I've evaulated the RTM version and I think the DivX bug is no longer present which means they've probably fixed the way SP2 now extracts file properties from DivX files. So if you have a pre-2180 version of SP2, I suggest you update to RTM, and hopefully all your DivX woes will be rectified.

beq

08-11-2004, 08:26 AM

tanalasta

08-11-2004, 12:54 PM

Doh. Just installed SP2 and everything seemed to be running fine.

Until I put my PPC into the cradle where it proceeded to hang my device.
How badly?

I'm now running Sprite's restore program off the storage card :evil:

It seems that it's not recognising my existing partnership and I have to rename/create a new one. And the silly firewall keeps trying to block Activesync connecting to the internet.

Oh well... It's Microsoft. What can I expect :P Only takes a couple of minutes to work around but I rather study for my exam friday!

Darius Wey

08-11-2004, 01:57 PM

This is totally unrelated, just wondering if anyone else had found that after installing the Office 2003 SP1, that their Internet Explorer now opens slower?

As to Windows XP SP2, I'm wondering if there are any minor initial bugs to be found which may cause Microsoft to update it to SP2a later this month (which they've occasionally done in the past)?

Nope, I've got Office 2003 SP1 and Windows XP SP2, and IE runs just as fast as it used to. But then again, I don't use IE anyway. :mrgreen:

Where you're referring to SP2 and a possible SP2a, I get the impression that you're likening it to the previous XP SP1 and SP1a updates that appeared. SP1a was not an update to SP1 to fix additional bugs. SP1a had the exact same features as SP1 did, except that Microsoft removed its Microsoft VM software in SP1a. You will most likely find that if any other bug fixes are found for Windows post-SP2, that they will be released as minor hotfix packages rather than being integrated into a whole new SP2 revision. Usually, these post-SP2 bug fixes will exist as minor individual packages until it becomes integrated in SP3 (if it is to exist).

Jereboam

08-11-2004, 02:30 PM

And the silly firewall keeps trying to block Activesync connecting to the internet.

Can you not just hit Unblock? I did and all is well.

J'bm

Godsongz

08-11-2004, 03:03 PM

I installed it last night and all seems well except for a couple of things.

First, it totally broke bluetooth. I tried to follow the geekzone guide for bluetooth in SP2 but to no avail. My dlink dbt120 (revision A2) just won't get recognized by Windows unless I install the 1.41.6 widcomm software provided by dlink, and that widcomm software doesn't seem to play nice with the new SP2 bluetooth stack. Grumble.

Second, I haven't yet figured out how to allow a specific IP address from the internet to bypass SP2's internet connection firewall so I have lost VNC connectivity from my work computer to my home computer. Grumble Grumble.

Janak Parekh

08-11-2004, 05:48 PM

Second, I haven't yet figured out how to allow a specific IP address from the internet to bypass SP2's internet connection firewall so I have lost VNC connectivity from my work computer to my home computer. Grumble Grumble.
Add an exception for the VNC server. There's an "Change Scope" button while adding an exception to Windows Firewall -- where you can put the specific IP. Done. :D

--janak

scottseligman

08-11-2004, 07:23 PM

And the silly firewall keeps trying to block Activesync connecting to the internet.

It's not asking for permission for Activesync to connect to the internet, rather it's asking for permission to allow Activesync to accept connections from outside to your PC. Unless you need Activesync's networking abilities, you should probably just tell it to keep blocking.

Remember, windows firewall doesn't stop applications from opening a connection to a remote PC, rather it warns you when a local program is willing to accept connections from a remote PC. You should generally leave any application blocked unless you know what you're doing.

Godsongz

08-11-2004, 08:01 PM

Thanks Janak, you rock :)

brianchris

08-11-2004, 08:39 PM

So if you have a pre-2180 version of SP2, I suggest you update to RTM

I've installed on three of my five desktops / laptops.....so far so great.

However, where does one tell the version number of the SP2 after (or before) its installed? I want to insure I have the RTM (2180?) version installed? (I believe I do....downloaded from Janak's link, which was an official Microsoft site). Thanks!

Janak Parekh

08-11-2004, 10:09 PM

However, where does one tell the version number of the SP2 after (or before) its installed? I want to insure I have the RTM (2180?) version installed? (I believe I do....downloaded from Janak's link, which was an official Microsoft site). Thanks!
It is an official link. Do Start => Run => Winver. You should see Version 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158 : Service Pack 2)

--janak

brianchris

08-11-2004, 10:18 PM

It is an official link. Do Start => Run => Winver. You should see Version 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158 : Service Pack 2)

It certainley looks and feels official. But before I start deploying it on my 50+ computer domain, I thought it worth triple checking, even at the risk of offending someone.

I followed your instructions, and my version number was identical. So even though the version # you give (2158) is lower than the one DJ Apod gave (2180), the fact that the version comes back with RTM in the name makes meel feel warm and fuzzy.

Thanks for answering here, and thanks for posting the first official link!!

Janak Parekh

08-11-2004, 10:35 PM

You're welcome. :)

BTW, the 2158 is misleading. It's part of the timestamp of the RTM build. 8/3/04 at 9:58pm. It drove me nuts the first time I saw it too and tried to reconcile with the build 2180 count, and had to Google and read some newsgroups. If you want to verify it's build 2180, try looking at version numbers of some system EXEs or DLLs -- they should be 5.1.2180 or something like that.

--janak

beq

08-12-2004, 08:30 PM

Nope, I've got Office 2003 SP1 and Windows XP SP2, and IE runs just as fast as it used to. But then again, I don't use IE anyway. :mrgreen:

Where you're referring to SP2 and a possible SP2a, I get the impression that you're likening it to the previous XP SP1 and SP1a updates that appeared. SP1a was not an update to SP1 to fix additional bugs. SP1a had the exact same features as SP1 did, except that Microsoft removed its Microsoft VM software in SP1a. You will most likely find that if any other bug fixes are found for Windows post-SP2, that they will be released as minor hotfix packages rather than being integrated into a whole new SP2 revision. Usually, these post-SP2 bug fixes will exist as minor individual packages until it becomes integrated in SP3 (if it is to exist).

I see, thanks much for the info :) Interesting about the WinXP SP1a... I was also thinking previously like with the Office 2000 SR1a that came on the heels of SR1, and such...

Handy

08-13-2004, 03:59 PM

I haven't received the SP2 update yet. I think I'll install it, but turn off the WF feature. I'd rather just depend on my router firewall and ZoneAlarm, rather than clog up my PC with more stuff that I don't need.

Darius Wey

08-14-2004, 05:45 PM

For those interested in solving the XP SP2 and Nero compatibility problem, you'll be happy to know that Ahead has released an "official" update which claims to solve all your problems.

For Nero updates: http://www.nero.com/en/nero-up.php

Hope that helps. 8)

tanalasta

08-17-2004, 11:37 AM

Yay for Nero. Hopefully this fixes things... I still had problems with my drive recognising blank CDR's after SP2 + nero v6...17.

SP2 is working great now. Popup blocker's nice. System boots up quickly and runs smoothly (took about a week's worth of reboots for it to smarten up though. Not sure why)

Only thing I had a problem with was my FTP server - the firewall caused problems (even if i put the program in exceptions) though I suppose it was just trying to do it's job.

The express install (about 100Mb) is out for those who don't want to download 250+ Mb.

Janak Parekh

08-17-2004, 04:43 PM

SP2 is working great now. Popup blocker's nice. System boots up quickly and runs smoothly (took about a week's worth of reboots for it to smarten up though. Not sure why)
It builds a "prefetch cache" to speed startup. In general, whenever you leave your machine alone and the hard drive starts cranking away, that's one of the things it's doing.

--janak

Darius Wey

08-18-2004, 01:47 AM

If anyone has problems downloading the SP2 update because of its size, you can always order the free CD from Microsoft. 8)

Godsongz

09-03-2004, 05:12 AM

...it totally broke bluetooth. I tried to follow the geekzone guide for bluetooth in SP2 but to no avail. My dlink dbt120 (revision A2) just won't get recognized by Windows unless I install the 1.41.6 widcomm software provided by dlink, and that widcomm software doesn't seem to play nice with the new SP2 bluetooth stack. Grumble...

Sorry for bringing back a dying thread, but I thought it might be worth mentioning that I finally got bluetooth working again by following some moderately complicated instructions at ftp://ftp.dlink.com/Wireless/dbt120_revB3/QIG/WinXP_servicepack2/dbt120_InstallationGuide_winxpsp2.pdf, so if any other PPC thinkers are having trouble getting a Dlink DBT120 dongle to work in SP2, give that PDF a look.