I'm putting the XP updates on an old portable computer. After the SP2 package, there are 98 (!) critical updates installing on it.

And Vista's already up to SP3.

Kinda makes you wonder is they'll ever get it right...

 

Hello,

A couple of years ago there were a lot of virussus for windows.
My computer was blocked for the 3rd time then i desided to go to linux.
Now I am running OpenSuse 10.3 on my new computer and I am very happy with it.
Even swcad III is running by use of wine.
The only thing I use windows for is my pic programmer.

Greetings,
Bertus

 

I've had automatic updates switched off for the last several years and feel much healthier as a result.

Windows 2000 is up to Service Pack 4 (SP4)

Windows XP is now up to Service Pack 3 (SP3)

Vista has now Service Pack 1 (SP1).

I would recommend leaving the XP and Vista packs until they are widely distributed on CD as many problems have arisen with their implementation, not least their sheer size.

The great shame is that Microsoft forced Autopatcher to stop distributing the very useful patching program and collection of updates and packs.

 

My Linux distribution is Fedora core 8 and it is constantly updated. I just did a 233meg update and have seen larger. MS has a limited number of people to do the job and get it right. Free software has a lot of people donate time.

 

Hello,

Another vista joke found in a linux magazine.

Greetings,
Bertus

 

To be fair Vista is nowhere near as bad as XP for number of updates. I just installed SP1 on a works machine today and it was a painless experience, as has been my general experience of Vista in the last year or so.

Dave

 

In some circumstances, that may be the case. But Vista is the new ME - Windows 7 is due for release next year. That pretty well removes any interest in migrating to Vista, even with the price cuts.

One has to wonder what might have happened if MS had simply improved one OS instead of jumping to a new one every few years? Maybe not 95 or ME or 2000.

This would be a new thread topic, but I have always wondered why 98 got so many complaints? I crashed it a few time to see what did what, but never had an unexpected lockup or BSOD. I prefer it to XP.

 

I don't care for vista very much. My sister has it on her computer. I had to disable all the popup crap and auto updates for her. I am just used to XP i guess, and I like to play games on my computer.

 

In some circumstances, that may be the case. But Vista is the new ME - Windows 7 is due for release next year. That pretty well removes any interest in migrating to Vista, even with the price cuts.

I heard that Windows 7 was actually coming out in 2010 instead of next year.

I do agree on waiting for 7. XP will do til 7 comes out.

 

Technically, the actual release date is about one year after the initial MS announcement so they have time to get the worst of the non-functional features patched/removed.

Windows 7, whenever it shows up, is supposed to have the new (and doubtless incompatible with anything else) disk operating system. Of course, W7 is going to be buggy, so we'll have to keep XP going until W& SP1 comes out - and the word gets around that it helps/works better.

We have a passable extra computer now. Maybe I'll start fooling around with one of the Linux distros. My sticking point is trivial - I hate having to mount my own hard drive. Utter waste of time. Wonderful to know someone used to work with a timeshare mainframe.