Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on...

    i know, first post. searched extensively and found nothing but things for product key(s) and windbloz genuine advantage. first we have totally legit, XP 32-bit SP-2 retail from best buy version 2002 copyrighted in 2004; man i despise ms!

    i need to be brief. all you need to know is what ms already knows; that if one integrates their (first) RC into an OS install, then they screw me on how they deploy the bug fixes and make me uninstall, it will not install over top of SP-3. i would never do this acept it is worth trying due to time. this is the only thing i can try that might save me two months of deployment on the server here ironically being used as a production workstation. ms wanted to take over my CPU and remove everything, that was 3rd party, and totally ruin the machine then tell me what they tell everyone, reformat and reinstall. in fact that is how i got started as they know so little about their product, they tricked me into thinking the system proprieties windows on my machine the way it is deployed and dual addressing properly 8GB of RAM should read their bug of 2.25 (instaed of 4GB or 3GB and 1GB or if using userva= like i have to, whatever is really happening...) pae=optin /3GB etc.. with the .ini switches, not the 1.1 that it does and should on this machine as configured. if you are scratching your head now, i have 13 very robust PCI cards addressing all my memory, believe me this is how it will read when you do such a thing, and i was stupid enough to listen to them and start over. they also told me they would be updating SP-3(RC) but not how they did it with the uninstalls and no update and patches as they had done when i worked with them in the past on betas and RC's.

    i already found where most of the stuff is and how it is hidden, that did not even take a Google, but if anyone is certain on this it would save time finding out if this will help if I fake it into thinkinng it has SP-2, v.xxxx and allow me to update on top of SP-3(RC) and see how buggy it ends up. it is worth a try, as two months is time i do not have here. remeber too, absurd amount of hardware using an absurd amount of software and drivers; gosh what a nightmare!

    thnx,
    nullone01
    Last edited by nullone; 19th July 2008, 16:30.

  • #2
    Re: I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on

    I'm having a hard time understanding what you're saying..... other than you don't like MS. That's loud and clear.

    Is this a slipstreamed XP install with beta SP3? If not, why not just uninstall SP3 then you can reinstall the RTM?
    Last edited by biggles77; 20th July 2008, 04:17. Reason: Correct typo
    Regards,
    Jeremy

    Network Consultant/Engineer
    Baltimore - Washington area and beyond
    www.gma-cpa.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on

      Nullone, please post your problem again but this time leave out the anti Microsoft rhetoric so we can understand what you are trying to say.

      Also, please use a CAPITAL letter after a fullstop (period . ) that would also help decipher your problem. This is to make it easier for us to help you with your problem. Thank you. (Paragraphs are also useful in helping to make a post clearer)
      1 1 was a racehorse.
      2 2 was 1 2.
      1 1 1 1 race 1 day,
      2 2 1 1 2

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on

        [
        Originally posted by JeremyW View Post
        I'm having a hard time understanding what you're saying..... other than you don't like MS. That's loud and clear.

        Is this a slipstreamed XP install with beta SP3? If not, why not just uninstall SP3 then you can reinstall the RTM?
        10 "I'm having a hard time understanding what you're saying....."

        20 My apologies JeremyW.

        30 "other than you don't like MS. "

        40 Once more, after over twenty years of aggravation, and their total lack of understanding of what they are selling their consumer base; I get over agitated and my post was inflammatory and immature. Please "GOSUB 20."

        50 "Is this a slipstreamed XP install with beta SP3?"

        60 Yes. That is what some people like to refer to what was done. The MS installer was not used. We have not the time to work inefficiently like that with an OS that is several years old. It was also stripped of the functionalities provided that we have no use for that absorb precious resources.

        70 "If not, why not just uninstall SP3 then you can reinstall the RTM?"

        80 You must know that is not a"double click" away at this point; though MS says it is...

        90 This is just for humor guys and gals. I will be very serious and professional in my response to the second Moderator that posted here, as it does appear I am headed for a record second post banning... The Formal grammar you are seeing here is just to illustrate the idea that I got my roots with one of MS's first OS's on an OS, DOS/BASIC on a 6502 OSI platform with 4K of RAM I believe; it has been a while. I am very sorry for acting like this, but we only have a limited time on this marble and I think they are assuming I can stop time to infinitely fix what they cannot, as well as understand what they refuse to. Apologies all around are in order here. My next post should be A-OK; delete everything if you would like to save space or portray a more professional spin on things. Ironic behavior even of myself included.

        100 END

        Warm regards,
        nullone01

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on

          [
          Originally posted by biggles77 View Post
          Nullone, please post your problem again but this time leave out the anti Microsoft rhetoric so we can understand what you are trying to say.

          Also, please use a CAPITAL letter after a fullstop (period . ) that would also help decipher your problem. This is to make it easier for us to help you with your problem. Thank you. (Paragraphs are also useful in helping to make a post clearer)
          My apologies Sir. I am a professional as much as the next individual. I also always have a hard time "reading" others, as this is a computer forum, and we are on the Internet; I did use the appropriate Formal grammar in that sense. .. My sentiments for Microsoft were indeed rude and inappropriate but are sadly true, as my experience within their scope began with Mr.Gates and his original partners in a garage; so I can become frustrated.

          The issue I have is with Microsoft's legally distributed 32-bit XP SP-2 Version 2002 Copyrighted in 2004. The original build was derived from the following Microsoft source:

          Windows XP Professional
          English (United States)
          Service Pack: 2
          Version: 5.1.2600.2180

          After we spent several months deploying all of the IT infrastructure based on the lack of SP-3, the "old fashion" way, and were dong very well. I had an issue with RAM; that being a lack there-of, and ended up starting over based on Microsoft's recommendations. While they were incorrect, I forged ahead once more for about the same amount of time with the very first SP-3 (RC) that Microsoft had provided for us to test for them without informing us that we were not to be updated with the patches and such through the process until the release date.

          Due to this we are now "stuck" with the flawed original source (XP SP-3(RC) ) that we helped them to patch. I am at a point now that I believe I cannot waste anymore of our time and resources with their issues, and will be debugging and fixing their problems for ourselves.

          I suppose my post's title is not really on target any further, as I think the question is beginning to look a little bit differently to us. Now I am more looking for opinions on the value and worth of the final SP-3 release as time has run out to start again on this deal. We have a current Version number of 3264. I really have no way to know if there will be more or less conflicts with the final release than what we have now. Much time has been spent debugging their OS the hard way already. I was hoping to be able to install SP-3 on top of what we have, but due to the package we are stuck with a double click install is impossible...

          Microsoft wanted to tell us that it could be done if we would commit to compromising mission critical data as well as our own and our client's intellectual property. We have a legal obligation to our client base not to do so; just as Microsoft has to their OS (meaning they would not like us to be using their OS for free, as piracy IS illegal.)

          From a cursory look, it does not appear very difficult to go forward and force the install of the final release, but I do not know if it is prudent anymore. Does anyone have any experience with very robust hardware "workstations" for audio and video production what the "bug benefit" factor is from the first (RC) version to their current release? Basically what we have here is an extremely robust server infrastructure running as our main workstation. I hope this is of help and both more descriptive and "professional" in understanding the situation that we are facing.

          I sincerely would appreciate any opinions, or insights anyone might have on this matter at the current time. Thank you very much.

          Warm regards,
          nullone01

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on

            Your "code" post was funny.

            Keep in mind that this is just one persons experience, but I have found install SP3 over the top of an SP1 or SP2 installed O/S has a tendency to cause problems. The problems vary depending on what applications are run and since I work (employed actually since I try to do as little work as possible) in schools, we have a great number of different applications running (over 150 with many DOS and Win3.1 based, but not all on one platform) and a huge variety of hardware platforms and configurations.

            I have found that if SP3 is slipstreamed onto XP (obviously) and then installed "clean" then there are very few, if any, of the previously encountered problems. This has work with SP3 slipstreamed onto SP1 and SP2 disk but I haven't tried it on an original XP (no SP) disk.

            Unless it is absolutely necessary, I would delay the deployment of SP3 until you have throughly tested it in a non production environment. Again I remind you this is just my experience and opinion.
            1 1 was a racehorse.
            2 2 was 1 2.
            1 1 1 1 race 1 day,
            2 2 1 1 2

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on

              I am most pleased to have a moderator respond here that actually did not ban me! I guess I finally found a forum with some individuals that have not closed their minds to what is before them.

              I am in your camp as well, but MS got me on the old RC business. I was trying to be helpful, as my platform would fix a whole lot of people's problems since they refuse to support their products. When I was dumb enough to use the RC as I should have known better than to trust them, as they have done nothing but lie to me every time I call. Why I was so mad was I had two phone calls that they are analyzing in the legal and risk management departments as we speak that both made a solid case for at minimum cutting them in half for breach of contract and more importantly the support professional that gave me a call back blatantly absurdly said they were running a monopoly. I do have his info stored as they do, and that is why Mr. Gates is probably having trouble sleeping after several days. I was told that Microsoft Windows XP was designed to run Microsoft products and would not function with third party software, in no uncertain terms. Now you think about what that is saying and maybe you will understand why I just about got maniacal after listening to people like that two times each for well over an hour. First call, one question, "What is Microsoft's recommendation for NTFS cluster size based merely on Microsoft's XP SP-2 Operating system?" Why would they not be able to answer that? It took me 5 minutes to look at the OS, and separate some stuff out and do two simple math problems to determine that. During which this guy did nothing but insult my intelligence , beg me to say more about my problem with having the first (RC) build "stuck" on here and he just kept digging a deeper hole for his company.

              Every call I have made has ended in them not knowing what the heck they were marketing, and telling me to destroy my computer, and reinstall their OS with nothing but Microsoft products on it, and then seeing if that would work. You know the standard, pretend to trouble-shoot and then after wasting half a day they tell you to reformat and reinstall. They ought to be giving me Visual Studio 2008 Enterprise Edition if they want to play that game, as that is really what is needed to do an equitable job of fixing their problems, but they want some ridiculous amount like 100K for that package. Fortunately they stupidly legally gave it to the public for free and still have no idea what they have done there either... Yeah you read my right, that product is freeware. I am saying this as I really dare them to challenge it for they will lose miserably on that deal. Things are not always as they seem in this world.

              At any rate, on topic I did just as I believe you are saying. I took this retail release, and integrated everything that had been put up on Windows Update to that day, including the stuff needed for my hardware as well; a gigantic time and conflict saver. I then used the SP-3 (RC) and went again with it. As I said in my last post we ripped all the viruses, and bloat out of the product as well. I think it is safe to think I will not be changing to a Japanese keyboard anytime soon. I stripped it down to almost email size, and then thew masses of fixes and anything else I could jam in there and change without an installer before burning the disk that was still virtually floppy sized compared to the disk that came from the box here.

              The plan with using the (RC) was to help others as well as myself, as I knew they accidentally got a big speedup in SP-3. So once I got rolling, and got all of the applications we need on there; that was the gigantic task, and this machine as you might expect, even with all the right fixes made to get it to not waste all day shutting down takes about 65 seconds to shut down due to what is on and in it. Now add about a 4 min boot up time, and one can see that installing things that absolutely need a reboot can take forever, especially when the application takes several hours to install on gigantic pretty fast redundant arrays. I did think they would update me with the patches as I showed them the conflicts. Normally I would not report errors, but since I was tired of waiting on SP-3 that they cheated the world out of for what like 3 years or something? So I set it up to report errors, as well as think I was some other guy each time for hours. When I found a bug, I would just put in a loop, and then they would see that a gigantic number of people were having problems with things, and fix the problems and help us all rush a good package to market. What a thank you I received.

              I think the bug level is not too bad now, as I keep finding them and fixing them and I believe at this point that is all that can be done. As far as the idea of installing the RTM over top, I wanted to do that because I can run a full backup of everything in very little time, so if someone would have given me a definitive answer how to cheat it into thinking it should install, I could try it and if it was worse, in about 20 minutes be back where I am now. It took a couple of minutes to find what I believe is the thing that would need changing the version number. Does anyone know if that is all that would need to be changed, as how they have done the whole deal that I am displaying on my desktop is a bit more challenging, but I am 100% certain that if more than one thing needs to be changed, it is not the whole string below or anything. Do you have an opinion on what might need to be changed to get it to think I have an SP-2 Build, I actually doubt the $tring "Service Pack 3" has much to do with it, but I really do not know. If I hit the "pirate people" that steal their stuff they might know better. Since what I am doing has no negative legal implication I think it would be OK to ask the hacker community if they know what the deal is here, or is it something someone here is familiar with? Here is the data I am showing for my Build:

              Build 2600.xpsp-071130-1427 (Service Pack 3, v.3264)

              If posting my build number is a vulnerability for me or others, or a violation I urge you to remove it immediately, as I don't see how it is. I mean I am not disclosing my Product key or anything, and they know all of this stuff, as I still visit the update site every once and a while and gamble on whether or not what I decide to take will be helpful, or undo what I have already taken the time to fix, man what a hard deal this is!!!

              Thanks I do appreciate your help, and tolerating my BS. I have been working for the last well 5 years now a 20-21 hour day, and that gets hard on a person after that long, so when a great deal of the time spent during the day is on fixing their problems combined with the treatment one gets, I know I should be able to have more control, but sometime I just snap. Sorry if I got off on the wrong foot here. It would be neat to see if anyone here knows what little thing(s) in the build $tring needs changed to get the RTM to run its regular installer.

              Thanks everyone I hope to have time in the future to try and provide some help to others, as it appears right now that I have more of them than MS does. Don't get me wrong I am NOT saying I have the ability to answer anyone's question(s) here, but conflicts I could probably cover pretty well be it MS to 3rd party or MS to hardware. The only trouble is "Time is the enemy."

              Warm regards,
              nullone01

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: I need to fake out current OS w/SP-3(RC) to try and put the final SP-3 release on

                Again all your post has done is waffle on about how MS are the enemy and how you (a miniscule minority in the great scheme of MS users) are being personally screwed over by MS. I find it difficult to believe that someone would put an RC version of an SP into a production environment!! Even with an RTM version I wait for others to find the "problems" and fixes before deploying. I do install it on my personal machine so I can play but I do so at my own risk knowing that, as has happened in the past, if it blows up then it is my problem.

                MS support do support their product but since like a great many of us you may have purchased an OEM product that (if you read the EULA) is supported by the organisation that you purchased your system/software from.

                Do not blame MS for something you have done. If you have a problem then please make a clear post (without the waffle) exactly what the problem is and we will see if our members can offer suggestions for a solution. Carry on like you have and no help will be forth coming due to lack of interest in trying to filter out the information from the complaining.

                Finally, the tolerance level has been hit. Never mention "pirate people" in any of your posts again in the context that I have interporated it. That shall result in an instant life ban.

                Thank you.
                1 1 was a racehorse.
                2 2 was 1 2.
                1 1 1 1 race 1 day,
                2 2 1 1 2

                Comment

                Working...
                X