Forum Rules - Formats - Spotlights  -  Home - Library - New Additions

Windows XP: Why stick with SP2?

theotherosprojecttheotherosproject
edited January 2015 in Software
I've been browsing around WinBoards, and I see that quite a few people here use Windows XP Service Pack 2. I am curious as to why they choose not to update to Service Pack 3. Isn't it better to update to the latest service pack?

I can only think of the following possible reasons off the top of my head:
- SP3 bloats Windows, or otherwise makes it more resource-hungry.
- SP3 breaks compatibility with some older programs.

Comments

  • allgoodnamesareusedallgoodnamesareused
    edited December 2014
    I think SP3 was just security updates, so doesn't matter now, because XP's unsupported.

    Also, I think SP2 was supported until April 8th 2014, like SP3. Edit: Nevermind, SP2 ended July 13, 2010

    Like you said, it bloats, so there is probably no real reason, if it's just security updates and bloats.

    Although, SP3 has IE8, and I don't think SP2 does. Also, support for newer programs in SP3.

    The real question is, why stick with Windows XP?
  • stitchstitch
    If I recall correctly XP SP3 did *not* update IE unless you did it manually and was the reason IE 6 was supported far, far past it's sell-by date.
  • dosboxdosbox
    IE6 was a shitpile when it came out, it is still a shitpile.

    For those who want get catch viri, it has been very useful for that purpose since it was released.

    I am not one of those people.
  • BlueSunBlueSun
    I don't think SP3 "bloated" XP... actually, if I remember correctly, some were claiming slight performance improvements with SP3 vs SP2.
  • SomeGuySomeGuy
    I'm not aware of any disadvantages to SP3 over SP2.

    Service packs always risk breaking things, especially poorly written corporate dreck. I seem to recall one of the service packs broke some common printer driver that was using undocumented kernel stuff that changed. But I'm fairly sure that got updated.

    I had heard of some companies sticking with SP2 for a long time after SP3's release, but no idea specifically why.

    Of course, when such updates are new it is often better to let someone else be the guinea pig
  • SkoraSkora
    I had a copy of Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005, and i noticed a significant performance difference between SP3, and SP2, i also found that SP3 was more stable.
  • calvinbcalvinb
    SP2 was the release that actually changed things. It was more like XP R2 in how much it changed for a service pack.
  • BODBOD
    theotherosproject wrote:
    SP3 bloats Windows, or otherwise makes it more resource-hungry.

    [citation needed]
  • theotherosprojecttheotherosproject
    BOD wrote:
    theotherosproject wrote:
    SP3 bloats Windows, or otherwise makes it more resource-hungry.

    [citation needed]

    EDIT: I've clarified a bit that the reasons were based on guesswork.
  • wingzeroisminewingzeroismine
    There really shouldn't be any reason not to upgrade to SP3, it wasn't a very life changing update.

    Also, don't go by my sigx image... that desktop has been upgraded since then and doesn't even have the program anymore, I mostly leave it there for amusement sake....

    After all these years my sigx account is still there and still hosting that image even though I haven't used the client in a good 6-8 years.
Sign In or Register to comment.