[W2K] Win2k Service Pack 4 Page 3

Author	All Replies
Snoopy2 Premium join:2001-03-29 Mobile, AL	reply to Skipdawg Re: [W2K] Win2k Service Pack 4 Installed de patch...all is well, up and running. -- RM1 (USN-RET)
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 02:12:11 ·
Rungel Run A Mile Live Awhile GT2110's Premium join:2001-12-05 Ya I'm Here	reply to Skipdawg I'll give it a try on my home computer. Will stop by and let you guys know how it's going later.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 07:36:54 ·
Hooper Premium join:2001-10-22 Villanova, PA	reply to Skipdawg anybody installed this on a domain controller or exchange server yet?
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 09:53:31 ·
jsbaker join:2002-07-13 La Porte, TX	reply to Skipdawg Took the plunge and installed it on my machine here at work. So far everything looks good. you know the Admin. has to screw up his machine before he tries it on everyone else's. The shut down / logoff problem does not some to have reappeared.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 10:49:25 ·
scottkeen join:2001-06-05 Kailua Kona, HI	reply to Hooper said by Hooper : anybody installed this on a domain controller or exchange server yet? Yes. Installed SP4 on 2 Win2K Servers. Server 1 IBM Netfinity 4000R rackmount Win2K Server, stand-alone Server 2 Dell Dimension XPS-R400 Win2K Server, DC Exchange Server 2000 No problems thus far. Everything seems to be running as before -- normal.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 11:44:15 ·
scottkeen join:2001-06-05 Kailua Kona, HI	reply to Skipdawg Got an error with a SP4 install on a workstation. Workstation 1 IBM Thinkpad 240 Win2K Professional The error I got during the install was a stop-error dialog box with "Unable to Log Event" and a red X and an OK button. Clicking the OK button let the process continue, and I'm still waiting to see how it turns out. FYI, I'm doing the install from a shared CD-ROM on the server. Not sure if the install likes UNC paths like \\Server\E$
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 11:50:44 ·
macboy Any Questions? Let's Roll join:2001-12-22 USofA	reply to Skipdawg Any idea when this SP will be released officially on the M$ Windows update page? I just checked and I didn't see it there yet. -- Who Wants To Be Next?
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 12:10:08 ·
Morbid Angel Bitten By The Wolf Premium join:2002-12-12 Bethpage, NY	reply to Skipdawg So SP4 is fixing MAD amount of bugs, but I also wonder, how many bugs are caused by SP4?
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 12:13:33 ·
Hooper Premium join:2001-10-22 Villanova, PA	reply to Skipdawg Might want to look at this article... Windows 2000 Sp4 - Is it Official?
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 12:48:48 ·
norris @mesanetworks.net	reply to Skipdawg Shows a release date of 6/26/2003 »support.microsoft.com/default.as···;q260910 Has the same download path that skipdawg provided, although I didn't compare the two files.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-06-26 13:45:29 ·
Hooper Premium join:2001-10-22 Villanova, PA	reply to Skipdawg I don't get it. Why would they deny it. I guess you can ignore the other article in my previous post.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 13:53:47 ·
EmilioG Whats This? Premium join:2000-09-19 New York, NY	reply to Skipdawg Wow, that was fast! I had just recently installed build 4.079. I'm a beta tester for MS SP4. I don't understand the rush. I'm waiting for my free SP4 CD from Microsoft, that's when I know it's truly official.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 14:47:18 ·
antdude A Ninja Ant Premium,VIP join:2001-03-25	reply to Skipdawg It's officially out now! »www.microsoft.com/windows2000/do···ault.asp Also, on Windows Updates. -- -- Ant @ The Ant Farm: »antfarm.ma.cx
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 14:49:25 ·
scottkeen join:2001-06-05 Kailua Kona, HI	said by antdude : »www.microsoft.com/windows2000/do···ault.asp Also, on Windows Updates. OK, the obvious question is, is there any difference between this official release, and the one that was posted yesterday at the beginning of this thread. I just installed the one from the link posted yesterday, and would hate to do it all over again with the official release posted today if it's the same thing.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 15:35:10 ·
c P Q a I M Perfect join:2002-11-24 San Francisco, CA	reply to Skipdawg Re: [W2K] Win2k Service Pack 4 just finished installing it...no problems yet...
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 16:00:15 ·
Peterg1 Premium join:2001-12-29	reply to scottkeen Re: It's officially out now! said by scottkeen : said by antdude : »www.microsoft.com/windows2000/do···ault.asp Also, on Windows Updates. OK, the obvious question is, is there any difference between this official release, and the one that was posted yesterday at the beginning of this thread. I just installed the one from the link posted yesterday, and would hate to do it all over again with the official release posted today if it's the same thing. I downloaded the one yesterday and also downloaded the one today and both files are exactly the same size - 135, 477,136 bytes - same version number 5.3.10.0 and the same timestamp of June 20th 12:29:47 AM. Peter
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 16:16:55 ·
Try this9 Premium join:2002-05-05 Infinity	reply to scottkeen said by scottkeen : OK, the obvious question is, is there any difference between this official release, and the one that was posted yesterday at the beginning of this thread. They are the same. Edit w/ more info: The beta testers have been informed the two are the same. Today's Windows Update is the "public" release. Skipdawg posted a "deep link" that was available a day or two earlier by MS to certain folks. Give Skipdawg a big "thanks" for the early download opportunity! [text was edited by author 2003-06-26 20:09:13]
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 16:22:26 ·
Bach I'll Be Bach Premium join:2002-02-16 Flint, MI	reply to Peterg1 Re: [W2K] Win2k Service Pack 4 said by Peterg1 : said by Kramer : I wonder if SP4 has an updated version of Spoolsv.exe? Any version later then or equal to this information should fix the Q329170 problem. Date Time Version Size File name ------------------------------------------------------ 28-Jan-2003 13:34 5.0.2195.6659 45,840 Spoolsv.exe »support.microsoft.com/default.as···s;814770 If anyone who has applied this SP could check this file. it would be appreciated. [text was edited by author 2003-06-25 23:26:27] I have just installed SP4 and spoolsv.exe is version number 5.0.2195.6659 (as above) but is shown as being created on May 2, 2003. What is different is the file size which is 45,328 bytes. Peter I've likewise got version 5.0.2195.6659 after applying SP4 and also 45,328 bytes, but yet a different date: 19-Jun-2003. Did some testing and the shutdown problem did not occur.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 16:29:28 ·
norris @mesanetworks.net from: jdong	reply to scottkeen Re: It's officially out now! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ OK, the obvious question is, is there any difference between this official release, and the one that was posted yesterday at the beginning of this thread. I just installed the one from the link posted yesterday, and would hate to do it all over again with the official release posted today if it's the same thing. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ IMO, anybody who would install a patch or service pack from a link provided by some third-party website, with no page from MS stating that the link is the final release, and legitimate, is asking for trouble. Much less the idea of installing a service pack on production machines without any testing. I see you installed it on DCs and Exchange servers..Scary, and not really a good practice. I really don't understand everyone's need to have the latest service pack installed, with no research and no testing done, before it's even officially released.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-06-26 16:42:18 ·
Logan 5 Wondering what happens next.. Premium,MVM join:2001-05-25 The WasteLAN ·Pacific Bell - SBC	reply to Skipdawg Re: [W2K] Win2k Service Pack 4 said by norris: IMO, anybody who would install a patch or service pack from a link provided by some third-party website, with no page from MS stating that the link is the final release, and legitimate, is asking for trouble. Much less the idea of installing a service pack on production machines without any testing. I see you installed it on DCs and Exchange servers..Scary, and not really a good practice. I really don't understand everyone's need to have the latest service pack installed, with no research and no testing done, before it's even officially released. Hello Norris, Welcome to Broadbandreports.com!! Why not join the site and see for yourself that most of the folks installing this are not n00bs and do indeed know what they are doing. If you want credibility for your arguments, posting anonymously is not the way to get it. I have a fully functional LAN at my house with W2k Server (my AD controller) with SP4 freshly installed last night. I have had no problems with it, nor do I expect any. I too seem to notice a slight increase in performance and on a DC, every little bit helps! BTW: Take another look at the top post. The link to the *list* of bug fixes is non-MS true enough, but the express and network downloads are 100% MS Again, why not join the site ( it's free or paid, your choice) and see everything we have to offer.....:) [text was edited by author 2003-06-26 17:31:40]
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-06-26 17:26:54 ·


Sunday, 29-Nov 12:42:55	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com. republican-creole page compression OFF