http://www.ebcvg.com/articles.php?id=670
Starting next Tuesday, April 12, computers running Microsoft Windows XP without Service Packet 2 installed will not be able to block the upgrade.

wtf

doh - I meant 6 days. Too upset to think straight.

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/42040.html
Organizations that still want to delay installing the update can disable Windows' automatic update facility, although this means they will miss out on any other updates released.

'k, I feel better now.

...NOT.

Linux sounds more and more interesting.

This sounds like a good thing to me.

I'm a rebel at heart. :P

Blarg, screw backward compatibility. New versions all the way!! Like a good quantitative measure, bigger numbers > all. Higher bug counts? Bring 'em. Longer load times? Bring 'em. More crippled features nagging you to upgrade to pro/enterprise/platinum/what version? Bring 'em. Bwahahahaha. VIVA LA UPGRADE TREADMILL!!!!!111oneone

No mac users posted in this thread yet? Well, I am.

At least with OS X I can make sure it can't forcefully update.

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/06/1657216&tid=201&tid=172&tid=218
Slashdot has picked up the subject.

Slashdot picks up every subject.
Slashdot is a old stinky whore.

>>9
I run Linux and like to use CVS snapshots and nightly builds as much as possible. But I, too, have the option of not updating unless I feel like it.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1783789,00.asp
Microsoft Corp. on Thursday announced plans to release eight security bulletins on April 12, including critical fixes for flaws in several widely deployed applications.

lol

>>9

Software Update keeps attempting to force me to install the 'iPod Updater.' I don't even own one.

>>14

Select the update and look for the option in one of the menus that makes SU ignore it.

>>14
I found it was easier to just install the damned thing rather than fiddle with ignoring each new update as it came out. The download wastes bandwidth, but much of the software is already in OS X anyway so it's not taking up too much additional drive space, only updating existing cruft.

I never liked being forced to updating, so I turned off the function right after installing my OS. SP2 will not be installed here, I disapprove of it!

http://netsecurity.about.com/od/securityadvisories/a/aamsbull405.htm
What are the updates, and links to patches' download sites for manual installation.

>>15

Thanks.

I'm so glad that I keep automatic update turned off. The last time I installed SP2 it broke my machine, It is not getting another chance.

Ah crap, I find myself banned from several jp websites for "using a proxy" after installing the "critical" patches. I use no proxy!
'Gonna uninstall them one by one.

No change... still banned. Maybe a coincidence.

>>22
Maybe...

• you went to their website after you installed the "critical" patches
• Website admin detected you using a proxy and takes note of your real IP (maybe you were detected as using a non-anonymous proxy)
• admin bans your real IP
• you uninstall patches
• you still find yourself banned

</tinfoilhat>

Nah... I have reinstalled all the patches since and I can surf fine. I suspect a spammer used my IP once. One of the 2 sites that banned me has unbanned me without me asking anything - prolly a temporary ban. The other site still has me banned - I could always ask the webmaster to be unbanned, but it's not like a very important site.
Plus, it's useful. I'm using it now as a test bed for playing with proxies. And gee, do proxies suck. Most of the time they are slow and time out a lot. And they often don't last long. One has to get a new one - and thus testing it for workability all over again - every day.

>>24

This is probably because most proxies are actually zombie machines.

Yeah... imagine how much more spam we would be getting if those zombies were efficient! *brr**

On the Undernet there are no proxies.

thanks god i dont use Crap XP

Win2K > Win NT
Win NT > Win 98SE
Win 98 SE > Win ME
Win ME > XP

srsly

>>29

interesting, i woldn't put them in that order myself. certainly XP does not deserve to be below win98, it's just win2k with extra prettyness...

i'd do it this way, though with win2k/xp allmost the same level :S
dons tin-foil hat

w2k > XP just
XP > NT
NT > w98se
w98se > WinME

NT and win98 are hard to place, NT can be a right pain in the arse and is prone to 'requiring random re-installs of the service packs' to keep it going... Win98 is more user frienly but memory-leaks itself to death with amazing speed usually :/

and as wor WinME thats just a case of taking windows 98 and raping it it o.O

quite amazing that they found a fairly unstable OS and MADE IT WORSE, but sold it well :P

>>29 is DQN

> certainly XP does not deserve to be below win98

some people avoid XP because of the "product activation", and things like >>1

i love you, win2k