Windows XP SP3 Build 3205 Released w/ New Features 286
jBubba writes "Windows XP SP3 build 3205 is the first official & authorized release of the next Windows XP service pack; and has been made available to testers as a part of the Windows Server 2008/Windows Vista SP1 beta program. NeoSmart Technologies has the run-down on the included 1,073 patches/hotfixes including security updates. Contrary to popular belief, Windows XP SP3 does ship with new features/components, most of which have been backported from Windows Vista. Some included features: 'New Windows Product Activation model: no need to enter product key during setup. Network Access Protection modules and policies have been brought to XP after being one of the more-well-received features in Windows Vista. New Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographic Module - the Windows XP SP3 kernel now includes an entire module that provides easy access to multiple cryptographic algorithms and is available for use in kernel-mode drivers and services. New "Black Hole Router" detection - Windows XP SP3 can detect and protect against rogue routers that are discarding data.'"
is IE7 included? (Score:2, Interesting)
I hate new features. (Score:3, Interesting)
If there are new features, release them as a separate "upgrade".
Having both mixed together makes testing a real pain.
Re:I hate new features. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're missing the real significance to this. They are back porting features from Vista!!! That's removing the incentive for migration from XP to VISTA on features alone. Considering the historic business model they have used, this is reason for further thought.
Dell and others have pushed Microsoft into a position where they (OEM) are allowed to continue selling XP software beyond the originally intended dates set by Microsoft. This is the first time anyone ever successfully told Microsoft what to do, including the US Government (interestingly enough).
Now that there is a continuance of XP in the market, the best thing that Microsoft can provide that customer base with secure products. If they fail to then it gives credence to the competition laying claims on security. If I remember, one of the points Microsoft was selling XP on was the security it provided above the Windows 2000/98/95 platforms. So there is something of a commitment they have made to keep it secure.
If there's a diminished reason to migrate to Vista, as already demonstrated, then what?
Re:I hate new features. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're missing the real significance to this. They are back porting features from Vista!!! That's removing the incentive for migration from XP to VISTA on features alone. Considering the historic business model they have used, this is reason for further thought.
I suspect that the features aren't going to be any of the most important ones, and will probably be ignored by XP users, but I doubt that it will really hold people back from upgrading. The main reasons people are not upgrading have little to do with the new features, and much more with things like the lack of driver support.
Re:I hate new features. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Sounds about right. Darn good thing I'm sticking with Win2k until they pry it from my cold, dead hard drive.
Re:I hate new features. (Score:5, Interesting)
Right.
The most important features of Vista were dropped before it ever hit the street.
Re:I hate new features. (Score:4, Informative)
I've been thinking the same thing, and still, I don't know if pressure alone made them backport Vista features. People just want the patches rolled up in a SP. Vista security features was unexpected move.
Put this next to the toned down Vista campaign.
I have the feeling Microsoft are fully aware of the problems of Vista, and I wouldn't be too surprised to see them gradually backporting the better accepted core/security Vista features to XP until they arrive at a slimmer Vista, and throwing away or redoing the ill mouthed Vista features (such as the current allow/deny security model which often asks the wrong questions and doesn't learn, or clarify the source of the action).
If only they realized this, they wouldn't waste 5 years on grand vision ideas and arriving at an OS that's basically worse than the sum of its parts.
Vista: the spare parts OS. Backport and reuse as needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I hate new features. (Score:4, Funny)
In Soviet Russia, government controls commerce.
What features? (Score:2)
What features would those be, better DRM and anti-piracy features?
Hardly compelling...
Re: (Score:2)
Cheers.
Re:I hate new features. (Score:5, Insightful)
For corporate IT, Vista is easy. Roll it out when and only when, its been tested, proven, and your organization is ready for it. Until then, just dont roll it out. Easy as pie. Now, if you've got end-users buying machines and trying to connect them to corporate resources without your control, then thats not corporate IT, thats just a bunch of people doing whatever they want.
And the black hole router detection is useful, and makes a lot of sense. If you're seeing problems with it, then it just may not be fully baked yet, and you need to give it time to settle out.
I mean geez, its not like anyone is forcing anybody to upgrade or anything. Your orgs should probably be at least considering buying vista with all new machines now, or as part of your VM purchasing, and just use the downlevel install options for now, that way you own it when you're ready.
If you're encouraging your clients to install Vista, when you know they're not ready for it, and its not ready for them, then you're a bad consultant.
If you're telling them its not ready, and they're doing it anyway, and then calling you for help, then you deserve every penny and more from those hours, cause you've got bad clients.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm an IT consultant for many companies as well, not just small companies with under 50 users. Any serious user base (100+) is an immediate NO GO for Vista, most larger companies are running at 256-512MB ram and are subpar for Vista performance, and do not have the budget for 2007-08 to do a large rollout of new end user workstations (and a lot of the budget issue can be due to ERP costs building up due to migration from older systems such as TOMS, to JDE/Cognos, SAP, Peoplesoft, etc., see this story [slashdot.org]). Anyone concerned with the end user experience, as you should be, is not upgrading to Vista any time soon. End user training, local performance issues, network performance issues, application compatibility issues, those are the first issues that come to mind.
For what it's worth, I agree. Sounds like many reason to make the choice NOT to go to Vista this year. There's nothing wrong with that.
Its easy to sideline quarterback this when you haven't attempted such a rollout for a client that seemed 'ready' for it, even after cost analysis and technical analysis. The beast that is Vista itself is not at all ready for a managed corporate environments with uptime requirements and user productivity concerns.
I'm a little confused why you thought they were ready for it, but werent. What happened when you did a test-deploy to a small but representative part of the userbase? Were there needs/issues/requirements present for the company at large that you didnt find in the test rollouts?
And if so, sounds like maybe its not time to do the rollout. Thats a fine choice.
I'm not bei
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Does the SP Install After The Hidden Update? (Score:2)
And I'm with the other folks - service packs are supposed to fix things. Not that I don't mind new features, but where I run XP, I'd like to have it be a two step process.
It looks like Microsoft has finally owned up to the Vista fiasco. I can't help but think this would not be hitting the streets if Vista
%$^^&, i hope not (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't use IE as a browser, but I still upgraded to IE 7 on XP because some other apps use IE components, and I understand that 7 should be more secure.
yeah (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
MOD PARENT UP!!! (Score:2, Funny)
MOD PARENT UP!!!
Slow-down code. Makes XP feel as sluggish as Vista
Re: (Score:2)
Elegant MS, really elegant (Score:5, Funny)
God, I love this company!
Re:Elegant MS, really elegant (Score:5, Funny)
Well, between you and Steve Ballmer, that's two.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Can't argue with that, but personally I think Ballmer more resembles an evil Peter Boyle.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously, since SP3 is included as part of it, it is really a Vista SP1 / Server 2008 / XP SP3 beta program.
I would like to note something (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For those too lazy, apparently some people over the ministry of agriculture of Japan were caught editing the Gundam page on Wikipedia while they were supposed to work. Hence the phrase "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam".
WGA will doom it. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the only reason we're staying away from Vista, and if this new activation is anything like that then it's SP2 until they drop support for it, and maybe something else (Linux, OSX) after that.
I've said my reasons we stay away from Vista In my Journal. [slashdot.org] I'm sure we're not the only workplaces saying the same thing. Especially if the computers are not anchored to the network and are off the network for months at a time like our systems are.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's the only reason we're staying away from Vista,
If this is your only reason, you better switch right now, as applications will soon require this sp anyway, or require vista.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
At the time we made the OS decision, We were running Windows 98/ME for whatever reason and XP was out for 5-6 months. Since we knew 2000 was on the way out and XP didn't have WGA or activation at the time for corporate accounts, we didn't see any reason not to switch to XP.
Eventually WGA came out, but it was still optional with corporate accounts. WSUS servers don't send out or receive the WGA updates Even if you wanted them. You would only get the updates by going directly to Windo
Re: (Score:2)
1) A Key Stealing virus infects all of your Windows 98 Machines, and you'll need to clean them, and at worse reimage them.
or
2) A Key Stealing virus infects all of your Windows XP Machines, and you'll need to clean them, and at worse reimage them, and to top it all off, change their XP key a few days down the road because MS thinks your a pirate.
Don't think it can't happen or can't be done since you're patched? it's easy. Send an E-mail to John Q Igoramus, which he will promply open and a
And best feature of all! (Score:5, Funny)
[Upgrade Now] [Upgrade RIGHT NOW] [FUBAR Existing System]
Protection against black hole routers? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Protection against black hole routers? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
PMTU black hole router detection seems to have been included in Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003.
So I guess it was a feature of the BSD TCP/IP stack they put in there?
As an aside, the same article describes the alternaltive way to change the IP MTU: Edit the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Network\{4D36E972-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318} registry key.
You just gotta lov
Re: (Score:2)
A black hole router is a router that incorrectly handles MTUs that are bigger than it can pass.
The term "blackhole router" has a completely different meaning these days. A lot of ISPs intentionally claim to have a route for traffic and drop the traffic as a way of filtering malicious traffic, like DDoS attacks. Technically this may be "incorrect" but it keeps servers running an accessible during a DDoS attack and is a vital tool for network security engineers at tier 1 and 2 ISPs. How this feature will affect the situation depends upon how they implemented it and what it actually does.
The only thing that's interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
Including DirectX 10? Few things about Vista are interesting besides that.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What "massive rewrite"? (Score:5, Interesting)
The main differences between DX9 and DX10 are new shaders and getting rid of all the legacy capability bits, neither of which has any dependency on the operating system or driver model.
I bet that if Microsoft gave the go-ahead to ATI/NVIDIA/INTEL there'd be DX10 support for XP in the very next release. The only reason they aren't doing it is because Microsoft is artificially blocking them.
They did the exact same thing with OpenGL when Vista was in Beta. Microsoft went around making a lot of noise saying "It can't be done!!" but the driver writers were saying it was easy. Eventually they gave in and Bingo! We have OpenGL on Vista.
Re:What "massive rewrite"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh you missed the part about the rewritten API and Object Model?
Or about the new kernel mode / userspace mode separation of the GUI (DX10 does, in fact, depend on new kernel features)?
Did you also miss the fact DX10 GPU's can natively multithread?
Or that they can use virtual memory?
Now, whether you can get it on XP or not: port enough of the Vista bits back and you can get everything in XP, you can in fact just slap XP label on Vista and call it a day.
Whether Microsoft should do that is another issue. It's perfectly legitimate of them to put major efforts on their new OS. I'll be happy if they, however, are quicker next time with the stability/security fixes on their legacy OS. I've been waiting for XP SP3 forever.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not that it can't be implemented without the new driver model (after all, NVIDIA's already supporting DX10 equivalent OpenGL extensions on XP - and Linux), just that it has been implemented that way. There's no way MS will spend money doing a massive re-write/back-port of DX10
They might if game designers start looking at nVidia's OpenGL extensions and thinking 'if we used OpenGL, we could get the same graphics quality as DirectX 10 with the same potential audience as DirectX 9. Maybe we could even do a Mac port cheaply...'
DirectX 10 support? (Score:3, Insightful)
New features, backported from Vista ? (Score:5, Interesting)
...and since it is possible, will we be getting DirectX 10 on XP too ?
...and if not, why not ?
--
btw. how can this be good for Vista ?
Re:New features, backported from Vista ? (Score:4, Funny)
Perhaps it's going to be soooo bad (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You see a few features backported from one OS to another, and immediately assume that they all can be with just as much ease. Interesting.
They also said OpenGL was impossible... (Score:2)
The main problem is that DX10 on XP would be a lot faster than on Vista...
Network Access Protection (Score:2, Interesting)
How can it be well received in Vista if Server 2008 is not yet out, and who well-received it? Or is there more to this feature?
Blackhole Avoidance? (Score:5, Interesting)
Does anyone have any details on the blackhole routing avoidance feature? While the summary claims blackhole routers are "rogue" routers, blackhole routing is the most common way to stop DDoS attacks and excessive worm traffic from giant botnets of Windows machines. If the OS now offers botnet operators an easy way to bypass that rerouting of malware traffic, this could have serious detrimental affects upon the internet as a whole.
Re:Blackhole Avoidance? (Score:4, Informative)
black hole routers just drop packets that are "too big"; null routes are self explanatory, and are how most ISP's stop DOS attacks.
Re: (Score:2)
black hole routers are not null routes. black hole routers just drop packets that are "too big"; null routes are self explanatory, and are how most ISP's stop DOS attacks.
Blackhole routing, refers to any routing of packets, where you claim you can deliver the route, then drop the packet anyway, whether because of the size or any other characteristic. At least that is how it is used in the industry. Both my company and several of our competitors who sell devices designed to protect against DDoS attacks have a mitigation method referred to as "blackhole route."
Regardless of what you want to call it, if Windows is starting to try some sort of verification and automated avoi
Re:Blackhole Avoidance? (Score:4, Interesting)
You seem slightly confused about how the Internet works, so I'm guessing you work in sales. How exactly is your average Windows machine going to avoid these routes? Or influence the paths that its packets take once they've gone past the first router in any meaningful way whatsoever? Theoretically you can do some tricks with the various lesser known ICMP message types to change the routes that your packets take, but you don't seriously think that shit still works in real life do you? Just try doing some source routing from an average ADSL connected host and see how far you get. I guess if the Windows box was acting as a router for an ISP and running BGP then it could be an issue, but we're getting into the realms of surreal comedy here. Just remember that as a general rule your ISP decides how to route your packets, not you.
I'm pretty sure that the "black hole" stuff they're talking about is the old PMTU black hole issue. I'm equally sure that Windows 95 had a registry setting that turned on black hole detection, so I'd love to know what's actually new here.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You seem slightly confused about how the Internet works, so I'm guessing you work in sales.
Nope.
How exactly is your average Windows machine going to avoid these routes?
That's a good question. Seeing as no one seems to have any details on how this is supposed to work, that's the reason I brought the topic up.
Theoretically you can do some tricks with the various lesser known ICMP message types to change the routes that your packets take, but you don't seriously think that shit still works in real life do you?
Theoretically there are a lot of routing tricks you can use and there are even more if you don't mind violating standards. What I'm more concerned with is if they're using some routing tricks that cause problems now, but on a wide scale by Windows, then in systems where, for example, you're passing some traffic with a GRE tunnel that re-onramps it to a do
Microsoft Login Did Not Work (Score:2)
Pretty hilarious.
Now, I think I will wait until after someone documents how to install SP3 without having to install IE7 or that WGA garbage.
Mirror. (Score:5, Informative)
How much Vista badness will we get? (Score:2, Interesting)
What I'm concerned about is the driver and software compatibility, stability and memory/resource consumption,
Halo 2? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Windows Product Activation? (Score:5, Informative)
After slipstreaming SP2 into my base XP install disk, a flat-format install did take a bit longer, but device propagation was FAR, FAR IMPROVED. There were a few other niceties, but they go beyond the scope of this post. I wouldn't be surprised if they're referring to changes made in the slipstream of the base install.
Re:Windows Product Activation? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Windows Product Activation? (Score:5, Informative)
nLite can also completely frak up an XP install. One specific instance that we encountered when someone in our office used nLite was the inability for anyone who was not an administrator to use USB devices. None. The only way Windows would recognize and install the drivers for things like mice, keyboards, and flash drives was if you were an administrator. I've seen others, but this was one of the most problematic.
I very strongly recommend that nobody use it in a business setting or anywhere else you care about stability. If you want to customize an aspect of the Windows install process, do your homework and learn about it. Don't trust a black box to do it all for you.
Re: (Score:2)
http://driverpacks.net/ [driverpacks.net]
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: Windows Product Activation? (Score:2)
One specific instance that we encountered when someone in our office used nLite was the inability for anyone who was not an administrator to use USB devices. None. The only way Windows would recognize and install the drivers for things like mice, keyboards, and flash drives was if you were an administrator.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but that sounds completely the way it should be. I've never used Windows XP very much, but I wouldn't imagine that it would normally allow a user without administrative privileges to load arbitrary code (like drivers) into the kernel, right? Or are normal users allowed to do that if the code is signed or something?
I never really did understand why Windows doesn't come with all its own drivers installed by default, though. Why do you have to install e.g. the USB mass storag
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've never used Windows XP very much, but I wouldn't imagine that it would normally allow a user without administrative privileges to load arbitrary code (like drivers) into the kernel, right? Or are normal users allowed to do that if the code is signed or something?
Non-admin users canot load drivers, start drivers, etc. However, the plug-n-play behavior that is what people see when they plug in most devices to USB ports doesnt run as the logged in user. It's a system service that handles the hardware plug n play. So when it sees a new device installed, if it recognizes it and has the drivers built into the system (ie, already loaded and trusted), it will load the drivers and mount the device, and make it available to all user sessions.
If it doesnt recognize it and
Witch! Burn her! (Score:4, Informative)
What nLite did to windows in that instance the user TOLD nLite to do to windows.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Windows Product Activation? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Windows Product Activation? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:But... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Full text (Score:5, Informative)
Following our coverage of the Windows XP SP3 beta leak almost a month ago in August, here's some more info on the official beta, which just had its first authorized distributable released earlier today. Say hello to Windows XP SP3, build 3205!
While the newly-released build and the one leaked a month ago (Build 3180) may share the same name, we can exclusively reveal that they are not identical releases. This release, also shipped as windowsxp-kb936929-sp3-x86-enu.exe, is 334.2 megabytes and has been made available to tier-one Windows Server 2008 and Windows Vista SP1 beta testers. Hashes are as follows:
CRC: 56e08837
MD5: c8c24ec004332198c47b9ac2b3d400f7
Along with the standalone installer redistributables (in English, Japanese, and German), Microsoft also provided the usual release notes and a list of all the hotfixes included in this release. Contrary to popular belief, Windows XP SP3 does ship with all-new features - not just patches and hotfixes, most of them backported from Windows Vista:
* New Windows Product Activation model: no need to enter product key during setup. Thank God for that!
* Network Access Protection modules and policies have been brought to XP after being one of the more-well-received features in Windows Vista. You can read more about NAP here.
* New Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographic Module - the Windows XP SP3 kernel now includes an entire module that provides easy access to multiple cryptographic algorithms and is available for use in kernel-mode drivers and services.
* New "Black Hole Router" detection - Windows XP SP3 can detect and protect against rogue routers that are discarding data.
Windows XP SP3 is compatible with all versions of Windows x86, included Embedded, Fundamentals, Start, Professional, Media Center, and Home Editions.
Windows XP SP3 now contains 1,073 patches/hotfixes, not including those in previous service packs. Of the 1,073 included updates, 114 are for security-related issues. The remainder are updates to performance & reliability, bugfixes, improvements to kernel-mode driver modules, and many BSOD fixes.
As with Service Pack 2, these include both previously publicly-available updates (whether through support.microsoft.com or via Windows Update) as well as any and all privately-redistributed updates for select customers or partners with specific problems/scenarios.
The first included update: KB123456 (April 7, 2006). The last: KB942367 (September 29, 2007).
We're checking with our MS contacts if we can provide you with the actual comprehensive list of updates included in Windows XP SP3, along with their descriptions and KB article links.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i'm not that big a sound engineer t
Re: (Score:2)
True but that doesn't really matter, his main point was to allow the user to define a minimum and maximum intensity and hav
Re: (Score:2)
Which you still have. Apps default to the same level as the "Device volume" unless you change them. Basically, each volume per app is a percentage of the volume level of the device. If you set an app's volume to being the same level as the device volume, as you increase/decrease the device volume, the volume for the app increases/descreases as well. If you set an app's volume to being
Re:Vista Sound (Score:5, Informative)
screenshot [0pointer.de]
It allows for setting the volume per audio source.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know Jack? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does Linux even have anything like that?
I can't speak for Linux, but FreeBSD has. Since 4.x (I think), the sound device has been multiplexed in to virtual instances, so you can point an application at /dev/dsp.1, and it mixes all of these in-kernel. With FreeBSD 5, this was tidied up a bit, so /dev/dsp was just a pointer to whatever spare vchan was next in line to be used. With 7, each vchan got its own volume settings, so you can assign a different volume level to individual programs.
There are also horrible hacks like userspace sound daemo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully, it's just a matter of a new driver model, not a capability removed.
Re:Vista Sound (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds like you've distilled the standard slashdot response to any Vista article.
Of course as soon as Linux copies the feature, then it's a great idea.
Re:Slashdotted (Score:5, Funny)
Work? Didn't you get the memo that Sunday is off?
Re:adding gasoline to the fire (Score:4, Informative)
I've been trying to find out what cryptographic features have been added to the FIPS security module in SP3. I'll be very surprised if there finally is some Elliptic Curve support or anything like that. It seems that
Anyway, the only thing I can find using Google is some page of Microsoft that's 7 years old. For the same FIPS module - for W2K of course. Does anyone have a link to more recent information? Currently there is little to discuss (unless you mention the missing PKCS#11 support by this arrogant monopolist).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The cryptographic API-s in Windows, just like the cryptographic API-s in OSX and Linux, are used for hashing and crypoting data using industry standard algorithms.
This is what IE uses for SSL sessions, for example.
Let me ask you something: why do you have to speak about things you have no clue about a
Re: (Score:2)
Lets hope they have put common SATA chip set support, or at least native USB drivers to be able to load them without the need to try and dig up a floppy disk or frig around with slipsteaming.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)