RSSWindows XP SP2 Delayed Until Late 2004
By Nate Mook | Published August 15, 2003, 9:25 PM
UPDATE Microsoft has confirmed that Windows XP Service Pack 2 will ship in 2004.
In a surprising turn of events, Microsoft has pushed back the release date for the second Windows XP service pack to the third quarter of 2004. SP2 was long expected to debut before the end of 2003, one year after SP1 made the rounds.
The change in plans came to light by way of Microsoft's Product Lifecycle Web site, which details future support timelines for the company's products.
"Third quarter next year would put anywhere from 18 to 24 months between the first two service packs," Joe Wilcox, senior analyst for Jupiter Research, told BetaNews. "This is a much longer cycle than between Windows 2000 service pack releases."
The possible implications of the move are far reaching. A yearlong delay gives Microsoft significant time to further its integration strategy with Windows XP – building more components directly into the operating system.
"It's possible that Microsoft is preparing a more substantive-than-usual service pack that would add new features to Windows XP or hybrids Media Center and Tablet PC," said Wilcox.
One such potential feature is Microsoft's PC Satisfaction package, currently in beta testing. PC Satisfaction extends the native functionality of Windows XP with services such as an enhanced firewall and virus scanner that give customers a better Windows experience out of the box.
Although Microsoft has not yet announced how it plans to issue PC Satisfaction in its final form, the company hinted that a new firewall would be enabled by default in the next Windows XP update.
It is unclear how the delay will affect the next version of Windows, code-named Longhorn. Microsoft executives previously targeted late 2004 for a release to manufacturing and planned to have Longhorn on store shelves by mid-2005.
However, an extended Windows XP lifecycle gives Redmond more time to maneuver and opens the door for Longhorn to debut in early 2006.
A 2006 release date puts almost five years between Microsoft's consumer operating system releases, following the launch of Windows XP in 2001. Microsoft has previously denied considering an interim operating system release in the form of Windows XP Second Edition, but a two-year development timeframe for Service Pack 2 may raise the possibility once again.
In the meantime, consumers and businesses will need to be vigilant about keeping Windows XP patched with the latest updates from Microsoft, rather than waiting for the convenience of a service pack, noted Jupiter's Wilcox.
The issue of patching came to a head this week after many Windows users fell victim to the Blaster Internet worm, despite Microsoft issuing a patch for the security hole in July. Microsoft has since told BetaNews it plans to improve the method in which patches are installed, as well as better educate customers on the steps needed to protect their systems.
"A second half 2004 release does not have to mean a crisis for consumers," said Wilcox. "When used properly, Windows XP's Automatic Update keeps the OS up to date."
Microsoft was unavailable for comment by press time.
I dont know whats so suprising about this... MSFT is always late for everything.
Score: 0
|What's surprising about this is that they're delaying an update.. ON PURPOSE. Sure, all their platform projects had HUGE delays most, if not all, of the time (we all should recall the nice little delay for Chicago's release) but this is a beast of at least a different color right now. We're used to seeing Microsoft shooting themselves in the feet but this is strange; it's like they almost want to provide, OMG, a quality product... ;o)
Score: 0
|Hmmm.. Though all arguments here are pretty logical and rational, I'd have to say that I doubt the fact that Microsoft would be delaying SP2 and, thus, implying a longer wait for Longhorn. Either way, I don't particularly care.. I'll stick to my Windows 2000 before I make an upgrade; besides, their products essentially skip generations so every other product is good, if you look at it carefull.
I shall illustrate this "every-other-product-superiority" theory: Windows 95 was a HUGE upgrade over 3.1 (over 3.11 for networks.. mmmm) but Windows 98 was mostly crap, at least in the beginning, as it only added overhead, constant disk fragmentation, useless features, and many headaches (kinda like Windows ME). Just my perspective, of course, so don't try to correct me when, really, it's all a matter of opinion, folks. ;o)
In any case, if Microsoft is seriously delaying SP2 then I'm truly shocked; maybe, just MAYBE, they are considering QA as an important part of their delivery process now.. WOW - now THAT'S a concept! Some of you may retort by saying "Well, Chicago was delayed as were many of their other products." but, let's face it, their delays were necessary. Products like ME and 98 were put on shelves ASAP just to bring in more money and essentially waste consumer dollars. In the end, these were some of many "buffer products" meant to tide us over for the real goodies. Win98 was good for gaming so I'll give it that but how many of you think Windows ME rocks? No hands?.. I figured as much. =oX
I'm not holding my breath for Windows XP SP2 but, who knows, maybe these integrated features will be good and not deeply-embedded in a retarded manner that makes ready-access and usability suffer greatly. Longhorn sounds promising too.. I guess it's just a matter of time. Perhaps Microsoft is really getting things done now. Partnerships with folks like Sega and ATI on the other side of their business, to me, is indicative of some sound judgement (finally). One thing is for sure: MS may not know customer service too well or provide reasonably-priced QUALITY products but they know business VERY well.
Hmmm... On that note, I may setup a pig box to test this XP SP2 when it comes out. Should be interesting, at the very least... 8)
...Oh, and Mac's are over-priced and often belong to pretentious people but, hey, that's just my experience. They needed to incorporate Unix to finally get some respect in the techgeek community and have some REAL networking functionality.. But that's another story for another day. OUCH.. This Mac is shooting evil rays at me now. BAH.. Too bad this project I'm stuck at in a major media company is all about the Mac's.. OS X is way better than other MAC OS releases, at least.. Kinda spiffy actually..
....Anyone want some Krispy Kreme doughnuts? =oB
- The Undisputed King of Techie Rambling
Score: 0
|As reported at:
http://www.wininformant....dex.cfm?ArticleID=39888
This article agrees completly with the logic I stated in my original post. Only sad thing is Q3 2004 does not equal Q3 2003, but rather Q3 Fiscal Year 2004 for Microsoft ... which goes from July to June...meaning it'll be released Q1-Q2 2004. So it seems this whole "well thought out" story was the BIG TYPO! :)
Score: 0
|FYI - We're already half way through Q3 - 2003. If MS really is going to integrate features into SP2, then Q3 2004 sounds more accurate. Not that it matters. Just keep your box updated regularly.
Score: 0
|Stop the bickering, who cares. Go out and buy yourself a new G5, then you won't have this probem of service packs...give me a break....security patches... it is a joke.
Obviously, I am a Mac user (and support Apple 110% over filthy Microsoft) and had to put my 3 cents in... now you can bash me...
polar
Score: 0
|That has to be a joke, right, or are you just being trollish? My Mac updates itself with security updates and patches just as often as my Windows PC and Linux box. Since no OS is fully secure so long as it's connected to the world somehow, security updates are actually a *good* thing. As long as people are smart enough to apply them/allow their computer to apply them automatically.
Score: 0
|Ignore him, his is just trolling. He obvisouly has no idea what he is talking about. If he new the Mac/OSX platform he would know there are always security patches being released. All Operating Systems need to be patched, plain and simple. Move along now.
Score: 0
|And just which day last week did you buy your First MacIntosh computer?
Score: 0
|Unless of course, your security patch also updates your Windows Media Player to the latest version without your knowing about it, then telling you you cannot do this and that.
Score: 0
|I don't really see how it could come out in 2004 considering i have the beta version of the SP2 for XP...weird...
Score: 0
|I am leaning towards a typo for sure. I am thinking Q3 2003 by the latest.
Score: 0
|Fiscal or Calender?
Score: 0
|This is obviously a typo. SP2 is shipping by the end of 2003. It's required for Smart Display V2, which is shipping in time for Holiday 2003. To me, this means "Q3 2003" not "Q3 2004."
But hey. Feel free to write a lengthy article based on a single date on a single Web page on Microsoft's Web site if that's how you like to keep busy. :)
http://www.activewin.com...Index=19610&Group=1
Paul Thurrott
...he would know sense he checks his facts...
Score: 0
|yah because paul thurrott always knows what he is talking about. /saracasm
you must watch a lot of fox news channel.
Score: 0
|Paul Thurrott
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Score: 0
|This is likely a typo. SP2 has been in beta testing all year, it's hard to believe that a service back would be recalled from a beta program to be redefined (if it's feature set is to change), and then re-released yet again for a whole new beta cycle. I believe (stress believe) that Q3 2004 was meant to be Q3 2003. I mean if Q3 2004 is correct, then that means SP1 for Windows 2003 Server will be released a whole 2 quarters before SP2 for XP...and that seems a bit unrealistic. Also, Microsoft's policy since WINNT 4 SP4 has been NO NEW FREATURES, only fixes and updates. I find it unlikely that they would change this now, especially how introducing new features in a service pack would (as it was before) causing more problems than it solved, because new features create more potential problems that have to be resolved by yet more service packs. PC Satisfaction will most certainly be released as a seperate package.
Score: 0
|Doubt BetaNews would publish with less than 2 sources....
Score: 0
|The source was the referenced page on microsoft's website, that is the only source mentioned. I'm not sure though
Score: 0
|SP2 has NOT been in any beta testing yet.
Score: 0
|Standard protocol is to check with the source. But it's a weekend. Oh well, let's just let this spread all over the Internet and then have it rescinded Monday.
Score: 0
|Humm well the service pack has been in beta testing stages
"Windows.XP.Service.Pack.2.Beta.Build.1213" Though I do find it strange that they would move it back an entire year. Maybe this w32.blaster.worm was a real eye opener for them. If you notice the publication date on microsofts site is Aug 15. So it could be because of that. Who knows. I can see it either way. It could be a typo because of the beta testing going on, and it could be true because we all know how microsoft loves to push stuff back. If it is true that they are pushing it back I wonder if longhorn will get pushed back since that is suppose to go into internal beta testing in November and Pubic Beta Testing in Febuary. I am just not sure
Polar
Score: 0
|I think it is a typo for the following reason: on the Microsoft site, it indicates that Windows XP SP2 will contain hotfixes and security fixes (as expected). The Betanews article indicates that all sorts of other things will be rolled in -- which is contradicted by Microsoft. Think about it -- if, as on the site, SP2 is just bugfixes, and not all the extra stuff, why wait an additional 12 months?
(That said, I pray for SP2 -- it's supposed to fix a number of performance issues. I think performance of Windows XP with security fixes has gotten worse and worse, as Microsoft has optimized code for security and not performance).
Score: 0
|Warez groups and newsgroups are not a reliable source of information. Microsoft has not started a beta program for Windows XP SP2 and no beta builds have been issued.
Score: 0
|NOOOOOOO
NEEEEEEIIIIIIIIINNNNNN!!!!!!
Score: 0
|Why are you so sure that it's not a typo.
Until confirmation this is pure speculation.
Score: 0
|I was waiting for SP2, as it enabled 2 local logons 1 via desktop, 1 via terminal services.
Will now download a leaked SP2 beta to get this functionality...
Thanks MS....
SP2 should have been SP2, and the new stuff SP3...
Score: 0
|where is the sp2 beta
Score: 0
|So what's the problem? It was earlier suggested that SP2 would NOT contain any OS enhancements and and/or new features. But if SP2 IS to contain enhancements (as suggested in the above article) then I'm happy to wait. Just continue to use Windows Update for new critical updates and uncovered bug fixes. After all that's what it's there for.
Score: 0
|I agree. Although I feel they could release SP2 this year and a SP3 next year.
Score: 0
|one feature I'd like to see them add is the removal of WPA, it cause more damage then good, with the millions of computer a day activation Windows to MS don't you think that cause lag or an internet slow down? not to mention when I buy something I don't like being treated like a criminal! MS went too far there, and I want it removed from all Windpws and office versions. once MS relases Office 2003 and longhorn, that will be 5 or 6 product that MS alone has using to target thier customers. (Longhorn Office XP/2003 Windows XP Plus! DME and maybe Plus! XP nnot sure about the last one) with all that not to mention later on MS will relase more, the internet will be come dirt slow, and people will get used to being treat like criminals for obeying the law and buy software.
Score: 0
|yes...Product activation from microsoft will slow down the ENTIRE internet!
/end.sarcasm
Score: 0
|I hardly see how saying "Yes activate" is being treated as a criminal.
Score: 0
|Activation takes about 10 seconds on a broadband connection and I doubt it takes much longer on dialup. Once activated there is no further connection to MS in regards to activation. What's your problem?
Score: 0
|what else would you expect from microstuff? ;/
Score: 0
|I installed xp fresh today WITH sp1, Windows update was 34 MB . I can't wait to see how big it is in 6 months!
Score: 0
|Simply put... that sucks.
Score: 0
|There are Beta Releases for Windows XP Service Pack 2.
Take a look here: http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=9867
C u.
Score: 0
|No there aren't.
I'm on the Windows and service pack beta teams, nothing has come down yet.
Score: 0
|... Just because a build was leaked does not mean it is a beta.
Score: 0
|Hell, if you even bother to read the snipet they have it says that they think it is going to be getting ready to go into beta stages soon.
Score: 0
|