[Alanoll]

Quote

A number of keys and key ranges are blocked with SP2, however, legitimate users will have no problems updating. If you do have problems installing SP2, Microsoft's How To Tell site has specific information to help you.

Just to add on. THe majority of the "pirate" keys generated by the old keygen will NOT work. SO don't even bother or ask on the forum why it didn't and how to fix it.
The PIDs blocked are ALL if not MOST of the non 640 keys. I've only seen maybe one valid VLK key that's not a 640 PID. And then there are the keys online that do have a 640, those will most likely be blocked.




Just on another note:
Where did people start to think WMP10 would be included in SP2? WMP10 was released as a technical preview when SP2 hit RC1. and If it were to be included, it would be in RC1. Once it hits RC status, they RARELY add any more stuff.

[PalmTree]

I know it is not updated, nor will it be updated in the final version of sp2, but shouldn't IIS 5.1 have been upgraded to IIS 6, which is available for Windows Server 2003?

I know Windows XP is not a server OS, but if they are looking to make a more secure product, it makes sense to upgrade IIS.

Heh, I noticed that I didn't ask a question, or even provide any information... but it's 3:30am right now, so hopefully it will be excused

Palmtree

[gandalfgrey]

baliktad, on Jul 31 2004, 08:01 AM, said:

build 2177 (xpsp_sp2_rtm.040729-2314):

So... it's done?

[Aaron]

Probably. Its likely they're giving the rtm build a week long stress test in their labs.

[CoffeeFiend]

PalmTree, on Jul 31 2004, 12:28 AM, said:

I know it is not updated, nor will it be updated in the final version of sp2, but shouldn't IIS 5.1 have been upgraded to IIS 6, which is available for Windows Server 2003?

I know Windows XP is not a server OS, but if they are looking to make a more secure product, it makes sense to upgrade IIS.

No. That's why they make you buy windows 2003, webserver edition. The IIS in XP isn't meant as a "full featured" webserver, XP not being a server OS. IIS 5.1 has lots of limitations, some of which can be removed by tweaking around a bit. Also, lots of people think you could just upgrade it to IIS 6, but it's anything but that. They had to change things deep inside the OS to make IIS 6 happen, so you'd have to replace a major part of the system architechture (and all of it's various dependancies, so change most of XP's code to 2003's), which is not really feasible (and they still want more $$$ from you buying 2003).

So again, XP is more intended as a home/workstation setup and not as a server (which is also why only MSSQL *developper ed* installs on XP) , so they don't see a need to upgrade IIS... Anyways. I'm sure you get the point. It doesn't actually make much sense after all. The major security concern (by FAR) for the average end user/home user is having them use a firewall, a decent and updated antivirus, and stop them from being fooled so easily into opening nasty email attachments (and we wonder why 80% of spam comes from "zombie" PCs?). IIS security would hardly change anything to that big picture, especially since a very small portion of home users use IIS, also because a big portion of people with webservers run apache instead, and finally because most people that are more seriously into web stuff end up using a dedicated (or semi-dedicated) box with IIS (which could be IIS 6, locked down), for security, new features, testing and all...

[prathapml]

gandalfgrey, on Jul 31 2004, 01:24 PM, said:

baliktad, on Jul 31 2004, 08:01 AM, said:

build 2177 (xpsp_sp2_rtm.040729-2314):

So... it's done?

Uh huhhh......
Fact is, all builds since 2170 have had the "rtm" in the build strings. It is almost finalised, and small bugs are being ironed out. It is expected that build 2180 (or thereabouts) will be the FINAL release of SP2.

So, build 2177 (xpsp_sp2_rtm....) means nothing except that they are close to release - its not a "done" verdict - not just yet.

[peachy]

baliktad, on Feb 29 2004, 02:06 PM, said:

Windows Update components: Windows now ships with several WU components installed locally as .exe and .dll files in %systemroot%\system32 (no more "do you want to install and run... boxes!).  All appear to be version 5.4.3790.2082.  This is in stark contrast to most other Windows components that are in the 5.1.2600.xxxx line.  Since version numbers indicate code lineage more than anything, we can infer that these components come from the Windows 2003/Longhorn codebase and have been moved up to the XP SP2 branch.  Interestingly, if you have AutoUpdate=Off in your unattend.txt/winnt.sif, these WU components are not installed and you will be directed to the WU v4 site.  If you do later install the AutoUpdate component, WU will take you to the v5 test site where you can download all the beta patches.

Does anyone know how this will affect AU clients using SUS servers?