Gape

98 SE SP 3.32

2,361 posts in this topic

At least the complaining and whining will stop. There will still be unhappy people regardless what you do.

I think you should remove it and your stress level will go down.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about I grant everyones request. I'll even add IE6, DirectX9, .NET, VPN, KernelEx, RP.

I'll even add Regclean and all types of other tools. It will suck for the dial-up users but hey, I'm trying to get as many happy bunnies as I can.

I'll make everything optional and then everyone will be happy. I'll make the updated shell32.dll optional, the updated explorer.exe optional. Oh wait, the people who have slower systems won't be able to benefit

because, it will take too long to install because ALL the options is eating up resources. So now we are back to others users who are not happy. We can have a couple hundred options and many users still won't be happy.

THERE IS NO ONE SOLUTION THAT SUITS ALL. USE AS IS OR DON'T!

If we continue to have the debate, I will remove the SP all together. Only select individuals will see updates. I tired of this back and forth nonsense. I'm even being polite in asking.

Good for you PROBLEMCHYLD!

:thumbup

I don't recall Microsoft offering any options in their OS Service Packs, you installed it or you didn't, end of story.

If it broke things because of the type of hardware or configuration of your system, you sorted it out afterwards.

There are always going to be a few people who will run into problems after a blanket update of system files, and you will never finish this if you try and take all their possible problems into account.

People with problems are right to mention them of course, but if you decide that what's there is good enough to work in the vast majority of cases, and the flagged problems are not going to be widespread enough to modify the SP to take them into account, that is your decision and that should be accepted and respected.

:yes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about I grant everyones request. I'll even add IE6, DirectX9, .NET, VPN, KernelEx, RP.

I'll even add Regclean and all types of other tools. It will suck for the dial-up users but hey, I'm trying to get as many happy bunnies as I can.

I'll make everything optional and then everyone will be happy. I'll make the updated shell32.dll optional, the updated explorer.exe optional. Oh wait, the people who have slower systems won't be able to benefit

because, it will take too long to install because ALL the options is eating up resources. So now we are back to others users who are not happy. We can have a couple hundred options and many users still won't be happy.

THERE IS NO ONE SOLUTION THAT SUITS ALL. USE AS IS OR DON'T!

If we continue to have the debate, I will remove the SP all together. Only select individuals will see updates. I tired of this back and forth nonsense. I'm even being polite in asking.

Good for you PROBLEMCHYLD!

:thumbup

I don't recall Microsoft offering any options in their OS Service Packs, you installed it or you didn't, end of story.

If it broke things because of the type of hardware or configuration of your system, you sorted it out afterwards.

There are always going to be a few people who will run into problems after a blanket update of system files, and you will never finish this if you try and take all their possible problems into account.

People with problems are right to mention them of course, but if you decide that what's there is good enough to work in the vast majority of cases, and the flagged problems are not going to be widespread enough to modify the SP to take them into account, that is your decision and that should be accepted and respected.

:yes:

You should be crowned for this. Great feedback.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall Microsoft offering any options in their OS Service Packs, you installed it or you didn't, end of story.

Granted. But Microsoft also does not include every single hodgepodge update or installable package that exists for a given OS.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall Microsoft offering any options in their OS Service Packs, you installed it or you didn't, end of story.

Granted. But Microsoft also does not include every single hodgepodge update or installable package that exists for a given OS.

No but they create them for the system. They give you the option to download it and install it. The same option sp does.

The way packages are disappearing off the net, with the sp we wont have to go searching for 300 packages or updates.

Edited by Hu$tle
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might I suggest before anything gets "silly" that the BASIC package be offered "as-is" with BASIC optionals and any ADDITIONAL optional be placed in SEPARATE packages. It's easy enough to "add" (e.g.) IE6 after-the-fact as long as it doesn't BREAK the BASIC's. Sheesh! You could fill a whole CD with "Optional Optionals". This type of thing has occurred before with other "update" packs. (Check all of the other ones and "'order-of-install" etc.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They give you the option to download it and install it. The same option sp does.

The way packages are disappearing off the net, with the sp we wont have to go searching for 300 packages or updates.

The issue here is NOT the "inclusion" of various packages. It's whether or not those packages install by default or by user choice.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The issue here is NOT the "inclusion" of various packages. It's whether or not those packages install by default or by user choice.
AHA!!! The crux of the matter... AutoPatcher anyone?

P.M. (post-mortem) - don't make me have to download this NOW before it goes bye-bye.

Edited by submix8c
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Granted. But Microsoft also does not include every single hodgepodge update or installable package that exists for a given OS.

Also, I wouldn't call what MS does either "smart" or "friendly". :whistle:

But again, as I see it, there are no issues, something was asked, that something was refused, nothing particurarly serious happened, and whatever it was, it seems to me like it is OVER. :)

Personally, since I don't use 9x/Me normally, I have no interest in the development of the SP, if PROBLEMCHYLD (or anyone else) needs some help for this or another project I will gladly try to help :) (within my limits) , what I tried - evidently completely failing at it :w00t: - was to try reducing the whining and suggesting everyone to take it easier :yes: .

Should anyone want to play "aggressive diplomacy", no prob whatever :no: , though :

aggressiveDimplomacy.jpg

:lol:

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might I suggest before anything gets "silly" that the BASIC package be offered "as-is" with BASIC optionals and any ADDITIONAL optional be placed in SEPARATE packages. It's easy enough to "add" (e.g.) IE6 after-the-fact as long as it doesn't BREAK the BASIC's. Sheesh! You could fill a whole CD with "Optional Optionals". This type of thing has occurred before with other "update" packs. (Check all of the other ones and "'order-of-install" etc.)

This is what SP2 is for, a basic system.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I wouldn't call what MS does either "smart" or "friendly". :whistle:

Also granted. But that wasn't what I meant to imply.

My point does back to what I said about this project being a Service Pack. If it remains a system update that installs bugfixes or corrects issues on a wide range of systems, then it's great and it deserves the "Service Pack" title. But, if it goes into the realm of installing every single installable package for 98SE and customizing the system according to what one person or a group of people think it should be, then it should no longer be called a "Service Pack."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I wouldn't call what MS does either "smart" or "friendly". :whistle:

Also granted. But that wasn't what I meant to imply.

My point does back to what I said about this project being a Service Pack. If it remains a system update that installs bugfixes or corrects issues on a wide range of systems, then it's great and it deserves the "Service Pack" title. But, if it goes into the realm of installing every single installable package for 98SE and customizing the system according to what one person or a group of people think it should be, then it should no longer be called a "Service Pack."

So what you are saying is, if M$ bundled all their packages/updates/tools in to one package, its not a SP? Well gape should change the title because Sp3 only extends his works. Edited by Hu$tle
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point does back to what I said about this project being a Service Pack. If it remains a system update that installs bugfixes or corrects issues on a wide range of systems, then it's great and it deserves the "Service Pack" title. But, if it goes into the realm of installing every single installable package for 98SE and customizing the system according to what one person or a group of people think it should be, then it should no longer be called a "Service Pack."

I agree, it's then more accurately termed an Enhancement Pack IMO, which is a completely different animal.

:)

Edited by Dave-H
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what you are saying is, if M$ bundled all their packages/updates/tools in to one package, its not a SP?

Not by the current established format they have been using. Of course they have a habit of changing things, so there's no guarantee what applies today will apply tomorrow.

Well gape should change the title because Sp3 only extends his works.

Not quite. Gape's project existed first so he has first claim to the name.

I do agree that Gape's SP pushed the bounds of "Service Pack" as well though. Several things were included that I think should not be, and one of those is still an issue now. (The Icons.)

Also Gape had some stipulations that have gone by the wayside in PROBLEMCHYLD's version. For example, Gape had a policy of not adding any files from Windows ME. This is no longer the case. While I personally believe that's a good change, that's just one person's opinion.

Edited by LoneCrusader
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PROBLEMCHYLD...

Do not loose site of YOUR original Vision!

That vision, which I've recognized from the start--

is coming up with "The Best and Most up to date Service Pack,

You Will to achieve.

What you have achieved so far, is most excellent "Gold".

There is no need to turn it into an "alloy" trying to please even the most well meaning members.

One must never be side tracked from the integrity and purity of the original concept---which you have been wonderfully successful at maintaining.

Keep up the great work!

Edited by cyberformer
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.