PC Tool....

I did what you suggested....still nada....just tried the scanner again on the other computer....it doesn't work there either might be bad....I'll take it to the local repair shop on Monday....thanks for your help

thanks, PC Tool....I'll let you know if it works...downloading now....

No problem.

I recently loaded XPpro on a new Core-2 computer....works fine....SP3 was available from Microsoft, so I loaded it. Should I have downloaded SP1 and 2 first? or does this version cover it all?
Also, I downloaded IE7....when I hooked up my HP 5550c Scanjet scanner, the computer will not recognize it being there...has anybody had this problem?

Sp3 is a rollup of all previous updates and fixes, including those in SP1 and 2.

As for the scanner, hit HP's website for new drivers. Uninstall *everything* HP on your system, reboot, and install the new drivers.

Should get it working.

Well, I've never been and never will be focused on the failure known as Vista so I'll wait patiently. Given that they know SP3 will continue to beat Vista in performance, I'm sure they'll continue to downplay it as much as possible.

Unfortunately for them, corporate North America en masse (not to mention many consumers) ain't buying the BS and are waiting for SP3.

Cute. Applying any actual thought to that, or are you just parroting the rest of the trolls?

Going purely by version numbers:

4 was slower than 3 on the same hardware. 5 was slower than 4, and now 6 is slower than 5.

This isn't news. This is the OS utilizing the hardware to provide more functionality.

Guess what? A virgin install of SP3 will probably be slower than a virgin install of SP2. of course, you'll blame that on MSFT trying to slow down XP and force folks to Vista...

Logic just doesn't play well with you, does it?

Just for fun, here's an analogy:

Half Life was *much* faster than HL2, hell HL2 won't even run on the same minimums as HL. Now throw in HL2:E1, with HDR enabled. Slower than Hell on the same hardware you ran HL2 on.

Funny that, huh?

Only thing is they want to add some things that they did in vista. Not a lot but some of the things... Like the security panel updates and new panels. I also suspect they are waiting for IE8 to be done so its a part of this SP3. Because its not very likely many people would download it otherwise on XP. Just IMHO. I also suspect they will add more WGA mandatory things in it... Like using Microsoft update instead of Windows update. And Prob a push of the Onelive and MSN live stuff... I just hope they do not remove Outlook express. Cause I know many that still are happily using that because of hotmail compatibility WITHOUT subscription. If you go to the new mail client in IE8 it will likely force you to loose your free hotmail access via outlook.

Again just my theory... MS likes pushing things on its users. its practically a company motto anymore. If they can find a way to make a highly anticipated SP be the engine for that adoption, they will do it...

I dont know what world your living in. Fortunatly, that last part of what you said is not true.

What part ? about the hotmail ? WGA?

"I also suspect they are waiting for IE8 to be done so its a part of this SP3. Because its not very likely many people would download it otherwise on XP."

It's not even due to contain IE7 as far as I know.

Well, as far as I'm concerned, I've been too lazy to keep my machine updated in quite few months, so I took my chance, downloaded SP3 RC2 from Fileforum, installed it on my machine, and everything works fine. So far, so good.
Disclaimer: experience may vary :p

I'm just glad they included HD audio in this latest build; SP3 would not have been complete without it. I don't mind waiting another month for or so for testing as long as HD audio is now built in, which should have been the case from the start.

This is going to make it easier for people to install HD audio drivers during automated install as opposed to having to install the drivers after Windows loads to desktop.

Tried downloading manually and automatically a couple of times in the last 2-3 weeks... and each time it does not update, the removal wizard pops up after an 2-3 hours total time, from the time windows update wizard downloads the sp3 to the removal wizard finishing, waste of time each time but still waiting

I a already thinking of changing OS over to something else and next time I buy a computer it may well be a Mac. I am quite tired of Microsoft now.

Ohh... so you are sick and tire of getting free service pack, and would like to try to pay for it every time now?

Err... Mac updates aren't charged. New software versions are. You know, like Vista costs money? And Server 2003 R2 costs money? Service Pack != new software.

Get it yet? :p

In that case you can consider windows service packs new software/upgrade since the build number changes.

I agree, Some people should be on Macs. No one can argue its end user friendly and simple enough for your mother to use.

Some people with top of the line machines brand new everything should be on Vista.

But most that have had their machines for ages now, and are happy with it, Should be on XP Pro... SP3 will be worth the wait.

And sorry But IMHO Linux, just is not there yet. Not for the masses. Even the real techy people have their troubles with it at times... Someday Everyone will be using it like we do with Windows now, and games and apps will be there for them out the wazoo. but that day is NOT quite mainstream yet... Maybe another 5 to 10 years...

Businesses on the other hand. Linux is well worth looking into... Of all things I have seen for Linux. Business is the most supported and cheapest solution all around.

Exactly, service pack=new software.
Microsoft service packs - free of charge (XP SP1-3...)
Apple service packs - you pay for it
(OSX 10.1-5).

Get it yet? :P

I don't agreed with you at all. For the premium you pay for a Mac, you can easy get a kickass machine from Dell at 50% or less. I doubt it you can get a Q6600 with 24" LCD for around 650+tax on a Mac. For $650, you can a Mac from 2 or 3 years ago.

Forget it already! Windows as already left XP behind, just as they did with 2000. Sure, they're providing minor tweaks, but I don't think that a whole entire SP is going to be available for a while.

This is a really smart business plan, as it will in the future cause many to switch over to vista. A downside to this is that those who don't want to switch over to Vista will most likely move over to Mac. Microsoft should really be careful in this situation, if they make the wrong move it's likely that they'll lose a lot of customers.
--
www.TalkPrice.net

I wouldn't be so sure...

http://eeepc.asus.com/global/news03052008.htm

"Amidst great expectations, ASUS today launched the ASUS Eee PC pre-installed with Microsoft Windows XP. This new offering of the ever-popular Eee PC promises to let users enjoy an efficient online and work management experience with the incorporated Windows Live and Microsoft Works features. This will help create additional opportunities for students and other personal PC users who desire a portable and affordable PC to easily access the Internet virtually anywhere."

Damned if you do, damned if you don't: MS releases something quickly, then there's outrage if there are issues and why MS didn't take more time testing and refining; MS takes more time to test and refine then there's outrage that MS is taking so long. Got to love the "rationale" there.

What's wrong with SP2? Never experience a crash with it. Of course, if you install crapware, that's another story.

Nothing is wrong with SP2, it's a beaut!

What I dread is the copious amount of updates that have to be installed AFTER a clean SP2 install.

This should shave off an hour or so each time you have to install Windows XP for someone.

You should be happy that they provide you with update free instead of a fee. Sp2 came out August 2004, and for Christ sake, it's almost 4 years, and you expect no patches?

It takes an hour to downloaded and install all patches if you install with original SP2. It's a 1 time thing anyway. If you are smart, you would have make an image of it, and it case it mess up. You can restore it in 10 to 20 minutes.

Erm, sounds like what you need is SP3!

I downloaded and installed the 'beta' SP3 and was disappointed with it. I'm partial to IE-6 because I can use a single toolbar/header - this is especially useful with a notebook computer. SP3 does a crummy job supporting IE-6, a rather glaring oversight by Microsoft. So I re-installed the SP2 configuration thanks to Norton Ghost. Microsoft had better fix the glitches in SP3 beta, or lots of folks will be as annoyed as the poor Vista users with Vista SP1.

or lots of folks will be as annoyed as the poor Vista users with Vista SP1.

Most Vista users are quite pleased with SP1.

Most people don't use IE6, MS doesn't even support IE6 anymore. IE7 is more secure and faster and I never heard anyone complain about the toolbar/headers in IE7.

I'm afraid you're wrong on nearly all counts there, Squire.

IE6 is the most used browser still, it is still supported by MS and people have complained about the toolbars - thus the re-build with the menu bar on by default.

Why does Pc_tool keep contributing? His aim in life seems to be to only have a go at what someone else has posted especially if they dare to conflict with his views.
Give it up PC_Tool, no one is interested in what you have to say. or better still, change your name to Vista, then we would alll realise you write rubbish.

"no one is interested in what you have to say"

DON'T SPEAK FOR ALL OF US. Sheesh. Go troll elsewhere.

What is your evidence that IE6 is the most popular browser? For my .GOV website, IE7=60% share and IE6=54% share. W3schools and thecounter.com also show IE7>IE6.

"no one is interested in what you have to say."

Stop talking about yourself. Good bye!

I stopped using IE a LONG time ago. I urge you and everyone else to either do the same or at least try a different browser. Most (yes, not all, their mistake) websites are compatible with Firefox. If they aren't, in my opinion, they are lazy.

... And... What's wrong with Vista SP1?? It's a MAJOR improvement. No problems at all. Computer is running very smooth.

Not! OWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
The STUPID!!!!!! IT BURNS!!!!!! Ignore the troll. He has no life.

and you not a lifeless troll with your kiddy webpage ?

Yup, Vista SP1 runs very smooth for me.

Dang! and I thought you were gone.

What the heck are you talking about?
Nearly nobody has been annoyed with it. People are happy with SP1.

Huh?
Thats more than 100 percent...

See this is where you are confused.

YOU are the one with all of the RUBBISH.

His aim in life seems to be to only have a go at what someone else has posted especially if they dare to conflict with his views.

I wouldn't say it's my aim in life, but what good is any discussion without conflicting views?

no one is interested in what you have to say.

Did you get this from the hundreds of daily discussions I have with other posters on this and other sites, from the many who have posted, even here, agreeing with what I said, or from your delusional fantasy world?

then we would alll realise you write rubbish.

"alll realise"? I got news for ya, bud: I ain't the one who can't write.

10 for effort, but that was a pretty weak troll. At least Zridling uses fancy formatting and hand-crafted a shrine to his own inadequacy for us.

Speaking of contributions:

Google Search:
site:betanews.com oldcodger

Funny how every post you've made here is a Troll. You whine more than a spoiled schoolgirl.

Ah yes:

From the site posted above
PS: For all who don't know me, I'm Zaine Ridling, who:
— is not a programmer I wish, but I don't have the brain for it);
— is a lazy, fat **** — I make no excuses there;
— is unemployed (see previous point);
— is poor and lives in a basement (see previous two points);
— is a proud atheist and liberal;
— loves the Free/Libre Open Source software (FLOSS) model.

A true Hero among Men, folks.

You high?

W3Schools:
http://www.w3schools.com...sers/browsers_stats.asp

February: IE7 22.0% IE6 30.7%

30>22. Back to school with ya. :p

Nope, SP3 RTM is ready and will be available to Microsoft Gold Partners in a few days. This is OFFICIAL information, well, official in a sense that it's from a trusted source.

Yet you fail to list your source. :P

Person working at a MS Gold Partner company, you moron.

Did you not see the :P face? :(

lol apparently not

Hopefully this SP will come with a timebomb that forces the unknowingm, ignorant masses that Vista is a superior Operating System.

You know I kid. I can't believe I paid money for this crap...

Most people to use Vista would have to buy a new computer...like my father and XP is fine for him because he just check email and checks movie listings, not much else. I wouldn't tell him to buy another computer, it wouldn't be worth it for him. When I buy another computer I'll give him my old one (only 2 years old) then I'll use Vista.

Yes Vista is a better OS, but for people who can't afford a new PC that can support Vista, XP is fine.

The company has good reason: it wants the focus to remain on Vista SP1 and continuing to provide updates to XP could lead people to hold off on migrating to Microsoft's newest operating system.

That is an interesting observation. Quite true as well, I suppose. Even Windows 2000 for a short while was prefered to XP by many, but by the time XP SP1 came out, people were ready to move to XP.

I don't think people (the majority) are ready for Vista yet, or at least not as many as were ready for XP when its SP1 arrived. I like Vista, but I do understand some of the frustrations with it as well. There are a couple of applications that we run at work that simply do not work with Vista. This is the application's manufacturer's fault and not Microsoft's fault, I feel, but in the end it doesn't matter whose fault it is.

That is an interesting comment and MS has done it before. I can't really blame them though, they want to better Vista and get more people on it. I think thats why they brought out Windows ME at the time, which was worse than 98, because they wanted people to start using XP when it come out.

I haven't upgraded to Vista yet (I have the CD's), because of hardware (which is why I'm guessing a lot of people haven't). I still have a single core processor and 2 gigs of ram which should be enough, but if it runs slower than XP then I'd rather wait till I get a new computer (probably in the next few months). Plus I have Vista Ultimate and I know most computers come with Vista home 32, so I can do a duel boot with Vista 64 Ultimate and test out software and games I use.

BetaNews should have been aware and posted that this was the same build of RC2 that was released a couple of weeks ago.
I wasted a whole lot of time only to find out it was the same build I already had.

The aim of this build is to improve deployment through Windows Update, thats why. Though the build number is gone from System Properties.

Wrong, this is not the registry tweak one. It's the full download of the build that was out a few weeks ago.
BetaNews has misinformation up.

This article is about build 5508. It is the latest refresh of RC2 and just came out.

What is build .5508?
The version that I downloaded this afternoon from BetaNews is v.3311.
Unless they have found there mistake and corrected it since about 1PM.

The original SP3 RC2 release was 3311, the latest refresh build is 5508.

http://forums.microsoft....mp;SiteID=17&mode=1

Thank you Banquo.
But what I don't understand is why BetaNews is calling this SP3 RC2 Refresh, yet giving me the RC2 v.3311 on the download and not the Refresh v. 5508.