Two Hours for SP1?

[Char Jackson]

Be prepared for a flood of criticism.

...Strictly in the spirit of letting no pun go unposted ;-)

You never disappoint.

 

[Kentype]

I downloaded the Microsoft ISO image since I have more than one machine
to run it on; so those two hours don't include time I spend downloading
the massive SP.
Two god damn hours to install SP1? Good God, Microsoft is honestly
trying to piss off their customers.
http://img839.imageshack.us/i/w7sp1nowinstalled.jpg/

Luckily I'm "genuine."

I'm quite sure I have it on a CD, and SP2, also. For WinXP that is.

 

[flatfish+++]

Be prepared for a flood of criticism.

...Strictly in the spirit of letting no pun go unposted ;-)

Just ask High Plains Thumper = HPT for the link to his favorite
membership only pirate site.

He bragged about getting Maya for $25.00 so that means Windows 7 SP1
should be about $1.99, if that.

 

[Redjak]

"flatfish+++" wrote in message

"flatfish+++" wrote in message




I usually subscribe to that. But in the case of Windows I think every
upgrade is an improvement in some way.

If it's a security upgrade, and most are, I agree.

When I shifted from XP a while ago, it was humming along without a hitch.
After ten years there were bunches of upgrades, "tweaks" and improvements
to
be had. In fact some upgrades actually improved it's performance. IMO;
it's still a viable trouble free OS. It was the most stable OS out there
until the advent of 7.

Windows XP actually did improve over time performance wise.
There were some patches along the way that clobbered things but that's
just the way it is with software.
You can't test every single combination of hardware and software.

Vista was not good for digital audio work.
The DPC was too high on many systems.

Windows 7 is rock solid.
I have not had a single issue, which is why I am gun shy about upgrading

I was hesitant so I asked someone I know in the computer biz and he said
"yeah, do it". So I did - absolutely no problems. But waiting isn't a bad
thing.

I have an image and Dell Data safe plus all my important stuff on an
external and a backup machine so if I did have a problem it would only
amount to a minor inconvenience.

But if I had a Mac I wouldn't need any of that stuff. They "just work".

 

[Redjak]

"Lloyd Parsons" wrote in message

"Lloyd Parsons" wrote in message



That is a bet I'm willing to put money on.


Good things come to those that wait - and I'm waiting. And it's coming
..................... or are you claiming Lion is vaporware?

Not at all, I'm claiming that you can't show the % of problems with OSX
exceeds those of Windows.

Such a lovely loophole to hang your hat on. But if I wanted to waste the
time to prove a point I would.

But what I can say for certainty, a friends computer operations repair
sections Mac repairs, is 29% of the total computer repairs. Not bad
considering they only have 10% of the US market.

 

[Lloyd Parsons]

"Lloyd Parsons" wrote in message




Such a lovely loophole to hang your hat on. But if I wanted to waste the
time to prove a point I would.

But what I can say for certainty, a friends computer operations repair
sections Mac repairs, is 29% of the total computer repairs. Not bad
considering they only have 10% of the US market.

And I don't believe you on that very subject at all.

When I was in the biz, we were an Apple repair center and couldn't get
enough business to pay for the subscription fees Apple had at the time.

Add that to me and the friends I have that own Macs that almost never
have problems, and it leads me to believe that is bullshit.

 

[Redjak]

"Lloyd Parsons" wrote in message

"Lloyd Parsons" wrote in message




Such a lovely loophole to hang your hat on. But if I wanted to waste the
time to prove a point I would.

But what I can say for certainty, a friends computer operations repair
sections Mac repairs, is 29% of the total computer repairs. Not bad
considering they only have 10% of the US market.

And I don't believe you on that very subject at all.

When I was in the biz, we were an Apple repair center and couldn't get
enough business to pay for the subscription fees Apple had at the time.

In his part of the country it seems that no one wants to go near Macs with a
long stick. Most of his repairs concern "malware like" issues.

Add that to me and the friends I have that own Macs that almost never
have problems, and it leads me to believe that is bullshit.

Me and my Windows friends rarely have problems also. The same with malware.
That leads me to believe that all the bullshit written here on Windows
problems and malware is exactly that - Bullshit.

zara........ er, no ..... Redjak

 

[Ezekiel]

I repair computers and I can tell you Windows -- by far --
gets more malware than any other OS.

In other news automobiles -- by far -- get in more accidents than any other
vehicle.

 

[Lloyd Parsons]

"Lloyd Parsons" wrote in message





In his part of the country it seems that no one wants to go near Macs with a
long stick. Most of his repairs concern "malware like" issues.

So I guess in his part of the country, more people like to go to porn
and pirate sites a lot?

That seems to be the only place that any 'malware like' issues come from
for Apple. And of course, since the only place you read about OSX
malware is from the security software guys trying to sell you their
product, it surely is a really big issue... LOL!

Me and my Windows friends rarely have problems also. The same with malware.
That leads me to believe that all the bullshit written here on Windows
problems and malware is exactly that - Bullshit.

Except for the fact that the malware on Windows doesn't come from here,
it is only linked to the stories about it in the legitimate press, you
are right...

zara........ er, no ..... Redjak

OK, come one, pick a name for today!!

 

[Ezekiel]

Straw man and an incorrect one at that.

So you don't think that having the largest target area (by far the most
users) has any influence as to what OS gets targeted the most frequently?

Since there are few to none Amiga exploits out in the wild today do you
attribute this to the "amazing security of the Amiga" or the possibility
that there aren't enough users to bother trying to exploit it?

 

[Ezekiel]

That's the FUD that MS would like you to believe. It's not true and
neither is your analogy about a car. Motorcycles. percentage-wise, get in
more accidents.

That's the point. Until now you never said anything about percentage-wise.

<quote>
I repair computers and I can tell you Windows -- by far -- gets more
malware than any other OS.

Continuing the lame FUD doesn't make it any more true. Linux architecture
is different from Windows. If you really want to know,

I do know. Given the choice between the two Linux security is better than
Windows security for an OS that's put into the hands of desktop users.
Windows makes it far too easy for users to make mistakes or get themselves
in trouble.

For servers (where there's a knowledgable IT dept) the difference is
negligible. The overwhelming number of security issues are with the
applications and not the OS.

Finally Linux, OSX, etc share several of the same security issues as
Windows. When there's a vulnerability in something like Firefox or Flash
then in many cases (but not all), the bug exists on all OS's that use the
same code.

which I doubt, research that instead of parroting the FUD you've heard on
line.

Keep right on doubting. Just to skew your results some... what's the ratio
of Linux computers vs. Windows computers that people bring in for repair? It
would be very reasonable to assume that someone who installed and runs Linux
is much more likely to repair their own computer than your a average Windows
computer owner.

 

[flatfish+++]

Bingo.

I agree with that statement.

However with the switch to social engineering tactics, the user is the
weak point.

 

[Big Steel]

I downloaded the Microsoft ISO image since I have more than one machine
to run it on; so those two hours don't include time I spend downloading
the massive SP.
Two god damn hours to install SP1? Good God, Microsoft is honestly
trying to piss off their customers.
http://img839.imageshack.us/i/w7sp1nowinstalled.jpg/

Luckily I'm "genuine."

This is a total lie. It only took 20 minutes to install sp1, which came
in an update along with other Windows updates that took all of 30
minutes to download through my Droid acting as a wireless hotspot.

 

[Flint]

But I am on my HP Touchsmart.

either MS is getting hammered or something is otherwise awry, but the
SP1 has been sitting there saying it is downloading for the last 1/2
hour and nothing is being downloaded.

Oh well, I'll just stop it and try later today. No big deal.

I've been hearing of cases of server overload since SP1 went public
that can cause this. I just updated a family member's HP desktop
(Athlon II dual core- 2.8GHz, 3MB RAM). I disabled the antivirus, and
all unnecessary tasks and pointed the system to Windows Update site.
The system was Win7(64 bit), and downloaded 84.5MB of files, and
installed in a total of 45 minutes, no problem. After the install and
reboot, I ran a quick manual defrag w/Auslogics, re-enabled about 6
bootup programs and everything ran just fine without a hitch.

 

[milt]

Just ask High Plains Thumper = HPT for the link to his favorite
membership only pirate site.

He bragged about getting Maya for $25.00 so that means Windows 7 SP1
should be about $1.99, if that.

Must not be a good pirate site if he still has to pay for a torrent
download! Heh