Re: SP3 and HP/AMD Computers

sasha gottfried wrote:
> I've recently learned, via this newsgroup, that SP3 will cause
> incessant boot problems when installed in an HP computer with an
> AMD processor. I see that there is a patch for this via the HP
> website. Of course, one wonders how to install a patch on a
> computer that just keeps rebooting? Why didn't Microsoft figure
> this problem out before releasing the update? There must be
> thousands of HP computers with AMD processors! Why didn't HP send
> out a special alert to customers with AMD processors?
> These are the kinds of issues that infuriate customers, and lead to
> all kinds of lawsuits. Thankfully, I read through this newsgroup
> and avoided messing with this SP3 debacle for now. I am grateful to
> the contributors to this discussion who have saved me the headache
> of indulging in another irresponsible, reckless, corporate abuse of
> its customers. Please correct any misapprehensions I have expressed
> here about this. But it would appear that, once again, the home
> computer industry is inducing unneeded stress, and sacrificing the
> time of its end-users, for the public relations illusion of 'upgrading'
> our experience and enhancing our 'security.'

The problem was not *any* computer with an AMD processor or any HP system
with an AMD processor - but those computers (any OEM) that had an 'image'
applied to it that was created and intended for a computer with an Intel
processor. Some of the HP computers were done this way - thus the reboot
situation in many of the cases - and HP is a large distributor/pusher of AMD
systems...

In other words - it was not something that could have been known beforehand
by Microsoft. Your accusations should fly towards the OEM that decided to
make a single installation image and apply it to all machines - AMD and
Intel alike... SP3 just 'exposed' the mistake of applying such an image
(one based on Intel procesors) onto such a machine (an AMD processor based
machine) without fixing it afterwards...

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Put the shoe on the other foot: Beta testing of WinXP SP3 started over a
year ago. Are you telling me that OEMs weren't aware of it and didn't test
it on their machines running WinXP SP2?

We saw nearly identical behavior on machines were Sysprep was used when SP2
was released. Are you telling me that OEMs don't learn from history?
--
~PA Bear

sasha gottfried wrote:
> Doesn't Microsoft confer with major computer manufacturers before putting
> out a major OS upgrade? As you say, HP manufactures many AMD based
> computers. Are you telling me Microsoft isn't aware of this, or doesn't
> bother testing their SP3 on such systems using this 'image' applied? You'd
> think that between HP and Microsoft they would 'expose' the mistake before
> allowing it to be foisted on customers. But hell, our time is not THEIR
> money, is it?
>
> MT
>
>
> "Shenan Stanley" <> wrote in message
> news:%...
>> sasha gottfried wrote:
>>> I've recently learned, via this newsgroup, that SP3 will cause
>>> incessant boot problems when installed in an HP computer with an
>>> AMD processor. I see that there is a patch for this via the HP
>>> website. Of course, one wonders how to install a patch on a
>>> computer that just keeps rebooting? Why didn't Microsoft figure
>>> this problem out before releasing the update? There must be
>>> thousands of HP computers with AMD processors! Why didn't HP send
>>> out a special alert to customers with AMD processors?
>>> These are the kinds of issues that infuriate customers, and lead to
>>> all kinds of lawsuits. Thankfully, I read through this newsgroup
>>> and avoided messing with this SP3 debacle for now. I am grateful to
>>> the contributors to this discussion who have saved me the headache
>>> of indulging in another irresponsible, reckless, corporate abuse of
>>> its customers. Please correct any misapprehensions I have expressed
>>> here about this. But it would appear that, once again, the home
>>> computer industry is inducing unneeded stress, and sacrificing the
>>> time of its end-users, for the public relations illusion of 'upgrading'
>>> our experience and enhancing our 'security.'
>>
>> The problem was not *any* computer with an AMD processor or any HP system
>> with an AMD processor - but those computers (any OEM) that had an 'image'
>> applied to it that was created and intended for a computer with an Intel
>> processor. Some of the HP computers were done this way - thus the reboot
>> situation in many of the cases - and HP is a large distributor/pusher of
>> AMD systems...
>>
>> In other words - it was not something that could have been known
>> beforehand by Microsoft. Your accusations should fly towards the OEM
>> that
>> decided to make a single installation image and apply it to all
>> machines -
>> AMD and Intel alike... SP3 just 'exposed' the mistake of applying such
>> an
>> image (one based on Intel procesors) onto such a machine (an AMD
>> processor
>> based machine) without fixing it afterwards...
>>
>> --
>> Shenan Stanley
>> MS-MVP
>> --
>> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Get yourself an abacus, Sasha.

sasha gottfried wrote:
> The blame game can go on and on. The arrogance, and lack of communication
> between these mega-bux, computer comrades is criminal. Who expects John Q
> Customer to know what the hell "Sysrep Scenarios" are anyway!
>
> Pathetic!
>
> But thanks to this newsgroup for the heads up on these corporate clowns.
>
> MT
>
>
>
> "MowGreen [MVP]" <> wrote in message
> news:OFCUI$...
>> I agree that the customer loses, sasha. BUT, HP has been well aware of
>> Unsupported Sysprep Scenarios for quite some time now:
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/828287
>>
>> Read the ' Different processor vendors ' section.
>> There is definitely something amiss with how MS tests updates|SPs and
>> with
>> their lack of communication skills.
>>
>> However, this issue is directly attributable to HP, plain and simple.
>>
>> MowGreen [MVP 2003-2008]
>> ===============
>> *-343-* FDNY
>> Never Forgotten
>> ===============
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> sasha gottfried wrote:
>>
>>> Don't tell me Microsoft wasn't aware of this! Or was it just a set-up to
>>> blame the OEM's? Either way.......the customer loses!
>>>
>>>
>>> "Shenan Stanley" <> wrote in message
>>> news:%...
>>>
>>>> sasha gottfried wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't Microsoft confer with major computer manufacturers before
>>>>> putting out a major OS upgrade? As you say, HP manufactures many
>>>>> AMD based computers. Are you telling me Microsoft isn't aware of
>>>>> this, or doesn't bother testing their SP3 on such systems using
>>>>> this 'image' applied? You'd think that between HP and Microsoft
>>>>> they would 'expose' the mistake before allowing it to be foisted on
>>>>> customers. But hell, our time is not THEIR money, is it?
>>>>
>>>> The OEMs pay less to Microsoft for the licenses of Windows XP (OEM
>>>> License agreements) so they can make more profit selling to the
>>>> end-consumer and for that they provide the end-consumer support for the
>>>> machine - including the installed OS. That is a choice they made.
>>>>
>>>> Given that choice and the fact that SP3 has been available in some form
>>>> (beta and otherwise) to the OEMs for over a year - they should have
>>>> taken
>>>> the responsibility and tested it. Not to mention - any OEM that
>>>> decided
>>>> an AMD processor was the same as an Intel processor (thus making one
>>>> image) likely should have thought that out better. I am having trouble
>>>> seeing it from your point of view that Microsoft (SP3) is to blame when
>>>> it was not Microsoft that made the image being used by said OEMs nor
>>>> were
>>>> they the ones responsible for testing things on the OEMs own equipment.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Shenan Stanley
>>>> MS-MVP
>>>> --
>>>> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
>>>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

sasha gottfried wrote:
> Yo'
>
> I can count...... Frankly, from a customer's standpoint, it doesn't matter
> who screwed up here. HP uses Microsoft and Microsoft uses HP. Meanwhile, in
> situations like this, they both USE the USER. Who are these prgrammers
> anyway? 25 year old hyped up ego-maniacal geeks playing inter-corporate
> competetive games with themselves?
>
> Like I say: OUR time...THEIR money.

You'll never convince the MS fanboys that MS *ever* makes a mistake.
They're acting like HP is some small mom and pop outfit that MS has
never heard of. The TRUTH is that MS throws out software for the paying
customer to test and then, and only then, they will put out a fix. For
instance, Vista was NOT ready for the public and won't be until there's
an SP2. Meanwhile, MS gets millions to test it for free and to top it
off, they PAY MS to test it.

You're right; it's criminal.

Fed up? Check out Ubuntu at www.ubuntu.com/. It's free and comes with
access to over 23,000 free programs.

What can be done with Ubuntu?

This:

Email
Surf the web
Burn CDs.
Rip CDs.
Listen to music.
Watch vidoes/DVDs.
Scan and print.
Spreadsheets.
Presentations
Newsgroups.
HTML editing.
Games like Chess, Tetris, all kinds of solitaire, etc.
Make videos.
Download photos from a camera and organize them.
Translations.
Use a dictionary
Learn how to touch type.
Edit images.
Send and receive a fax.
Take screenshots.
Create .PDF files.
Create and use a data base.
Instant messaging with over 10 different programs in one including
Windows Live Messenger.
IRC.
Bluetooth.

and much more!

What you can't do with Ubuntu:

Worry about:
The next update hosing your system,
WPA and WGA raising their ugly heads,
DRM,
Viruses,
Root kits,
Spyware,
and
Malware.

Alias
>
>
>
> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Get yourself an abacus, Sasha.
>>
>> sasha gottfried wrote:
>>> The blame game can go on and on. The arrogance, and lack of communication
>>> between these mega-bux, computer comrades is criminal. Who expects John Q
>>> Customer to know what the hell "Sysrep Scenarios" are anyway!
>>>
>>> Pathetic!
>>>
>>> But thanks to this newsgroup for the heads up on these corporate clowns.
>>>
>>> MT
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "MowGreen [MVP]" <> wrote in message
>>> news:OFCUI$...
>>>> I agree that the customer loses, sasha. BUT, HP has been well aware of
>>>> Unsupported Sysprep Scenarios for quite some time now:
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/828287
>>>>
>>>> Read the ' Different processor vendors ' section.
>>>> There is definitely something amiss with how MS tests updates|SPs and
>>>> with
>>>> their lack of communication skills.
>>>>
>>>> However, this issue is directly attributable to HP, plain and simple.
>>>>
>>>> MowGreen [MVP 2003-2008]
>>>> ===============
>>>> *-343-* FDNY
>>>> Never Forgotten
>>>> ===============
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> sasha gottfried wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don't tell me Microsoft wasn't aware of this! Or was it just a set-up
>>>>> to
>>>>> blame the OEM's? Either way.......the customer loses!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Shenan Stanley" <> wrote in message
>>>>> news:%...
>>>>>
>>>>>> sasha gottfried wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doesn't Microsoft confer with major computer manufacturers before
>>>>>>> putting out a major OS upgrade? As you say, HP manufactures many
>>>>>>> AMD based computers. Are you telling me Microsoft isn't aware of
>>>>>>> this, or doesn't bother testing their SP3 on such systems using
>>>>>>> this 'image' applied? You'd think that between HP and Microsoft
>>>>>>> they would 'expose' the mistake before allowing it to be foisted on
>>>>>>> customers. But hell, our time is not THEIR money, is it?
>>>>>> The OEMs pay less to Microsoft for the licenses of Windows XP (OEM
>>>>>> License agreements) so they can make more profit selling to the
>>>>>> end-consumer and for that they provide the end-consumer support for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> machine - including the installed OS. That is a choice they made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Given that choice and the fact that SP3 has been available in some
>>>>>> form
>>>>>> (beta and otherwise) to the OEMs for over a year - they should have
>>>>>> taken
>>>>>> the responsibility and tested it. Not to mention - any OEM that
>>>>>> decided
>>>>>> an AMD processor was the same as an Intel processor (thus making one
>>>>>> image) likely should have thought that out better. I am having
>>>>>> trouble
>>>>>> seeing it from your point of view that Microsoft (SP3) is to blame
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> it was not Microsoft that made the image being used by said OEMs nor
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> they the ones responsible for testing things on the OEMs own
>>>>>> equipment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Shenan Stanley
>>>>>> MS-MVP
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
>>>>>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
>

Alias wrote:
> You'll never convince the MS fanboys that MS *ever* makes a mistake.
> They're acting like HP is some small mom and pop outfit that MS has
> never heard of. The TRUTH is that MS throws out software for the
> paying customer to test and then, and only then, they will put out
> a fix. For instance, Vista was NOT ready for the public and won't
> be until there's an SP2. Meanwhile, MS gets millions to test it for
> free and to top it off, they PAY MS to test it.
>
> You're right; it's criminal.
>
> Fed up? Check out Ubuntu at www.ubuntu.com/. It's free and comes
> with access to over 23,000 free programs.
>
> What can be done with Ubuntu?
<snip>

Or switch to a Macintosh. Any flavor of Linux you want (that's all Ubuntu
is). Run whatever. Doesn't really matter.

Did Microsoft screw up in this case - I don't see it - all they could do in
this case is hope for due-diligence from the OEMs that had the betas of the
service packs, etc.

Has Microsoft screwed up in the past? Yep. Will they screw up in the
future? Likely.

As for Vista being 'ready' - some would disagree with it not being ready
now - some would say it won't ever be ready. *shrug* I personally could
care less.

I run Vista Ultimate SP1 on one virtual machine and one physical machine. I
run Windows XP SP3 on 7 personal/work machines that i use almost daily. I
run Ubuntu on one physical and two virtual machines. I run Redhat on one
physical machine and SUSE on a virtual machine. I also have a Macintosh
with OS X on it (that's where two of the VMs are.

Each their own - all have their advantages and disadvantages. A Windows OS
wins for general daily use and interaction with others because it is out
there in larger numbers so being able to get what you want while using a
Windows machine is usually less of a chore. As for updates and such - I
have yet to see an OS that is in use not have them.

Everyone has their own opinion - I say the OEM dropped the ball on this one.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Shenan Stanley wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> You'll never convince the MS fanboys that MS *ever* makes a mistake.
>> They're acting like HP is some small mom and pop outfit that MS has
>> never heard of. The TRUTH is that MS throws out software for the
>> paying customer to test and then, and only then, they will put out
>> a fix. For instance, Vista was NOT ready for the public and won't
>> be until there's an SP2. Meanwhile, MS gets millions to test it for
>> free and to top it off, they PAY MS to test it.
>>
>> You're right; it's criminal.
>>
>> Fed up? Check out Ubuntu at www.ubuntu.com/. It's free and comes
>> with access to over 23,000 free programs.
>>
>> What can be done with Ubuntu?
> <snip>
>
> Or switch to a Macintosh. Any flavor of Linux you want (that's all Ubuntu
> is). Run whatever. Doesn't really matter.
>
> Did Microsoft screw up in this case - I don't see it - all they could do in
> this case is hope for due-diligence from the OEMs that had the betas of the
> service packs, etc.
>
> Has Microsoft screwed up in the past? Yep. Will they screw up in the
> future? Likely.
>
> As for Vista being 'ready' - some would disagree with it not being ready
> now - some would say it won't ever be ready. *shrug* I personally could
> care less.
>
> I run Vista Ultimate SP1 on one virtual machine and one physical machine. I
> run Windows XP SP3 on 7 personal/work machines that i use almost daily. I
> run Ubuntu on one physical and two virtual machines. I run Redhat on one
> physical machine and SUSE on a virtual machine. I also have a Macintosh
> with OS X on it (that's where two of the VMs are.
>
> Each their own - all have their advantages and disadvantages. A Windows OS
> wins for general daily use and interaction with others because it is out
> there in larger numbers so being able to get what you want while using a
> Windows machine is usually less of a chore. As for updates and such - I
> have yet to see an OS that is in use not have them.
>
> Everyone has their own opinion - I say the OEM dropped the ball on this one.
>

I'd say both MS and HP dropped the ball. MS has heard of HP, right? They
know that HP is selling *their* operating system, right? Fact is that MS
releases software to be tested by paying customers who don't even know
they're testing it and that ain't right.

Alias

<snipped>

Alias wrote:
> I'd say both MS and HP dropped the ball. MS has heard of HP, right?
> They know that HP is selling *their* operating system, right? Fact
> is that MS releases software to be tested by paying customers who
> don't even know they're testing it and that ain't right.

HP has had access to SP3 for a LONG time. Longer than most consumers (and
they could have gotten BETAs anytime.)

However - the fact is this is not about SP3 - it isn't even about any patch
that would have done the same thing...

HP chose how they put the OS on their systems that they sell. They did not
use RIS, they did not use some unattended installation - they chose to make
an image (a single image) on one particular hardware set (Intel based
obviously) and apply it to all of their machines for some period of time.
Microsoft does not (and should not) have any say in how HP puts the OS on
the machine (what method is used to install it...) So - HP - given this
freedom chose as I pointed out and - in the end - it bit them.

It's all about how the OS was installed. If the OS was installed from
CD/DVD through the normal means or through some unattended network process
(RIS, WDS, etc) or even if HP had made an image for AMD systems and Intel
systems seperately - this conversation (using HP sepecifically) would not be
happening. They (obviously) did none of those things (at least for a time)
and made one image on an Intel based system (which they can do if they want)
and in the end - that messed them up.

Microsoft may know HP, may know them VERY well - but Microsoft does not
dictate something like how HP puts the OS onto a computer they
manufacturer/sell/support. ;-)

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Shenan Stanley wrote:
> <snipped>
>
> Alias wrote:
>> I'd say both MS and HP dropped the ball. MS has heard of HP, right?
>> They know that HP is selling *their* operating system, right? Fact
>> is that MS releases software to be tested by paying customers who
>> don't even know they're testing it and that ain't right.
>
> HP has had access to SP3 for a LONG time. Longer than most consumers (and
> they could have gotten BETAs anytime.)
>
> However - the fact is this is not about SP3 - it isn't even about any patch
> that would have done the same thing...
>
> HP chose how they put the OS on their systems that they sell. They did not
> use RIS, they did not use some unattended installation - they chose to make
> an image (a single image) on one particular hardware set (Intel based
> obviously) and apply it to all of their machines for some period of time.
> Microsoft does not (and should not) have any say in how HP puts the OS on
> the machine (what method is used to install it...) So - HP - given this
> freedom chose as I pointed out and - in the end - it bit them.
>
> It's all about how the OS was installed. If the OS was installed from
> CD/DVD through the normal means or through some unattended network process
> (RIS, WDS, etc) or even if HP had made an image for AMD systems and Intel
> systems seperately - this conversation (using HP sepecifically) would not be
> happening. They (obviously) did none of those things (at least for a time)
> and made one image on an Intel based system (which they can do if they want)
> and in the end - that messed them up.
>
> Microsoft may know HP, may know them VERY well - but Microsoft does not
> dictate something like how HP puts the OS onto a computer they
> manufacturer/sell/support. ;-)
>

Wow, so MS doesn't have one single HP machine to test on? Just shove it
out the door and see what happens, eh?

Alias

And of course you have read this:
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/s...os=228&lang=en
Microsoft Windows XP SP3 Upgrade Utility for systems with AMD processors.

--

TaurArian [MVP] 2005-2008 - Update Services
http://taurarian.mvps.org
======================================
How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
Computer Maintenance: Acronis / Diskeeper / Paragon / Raxco


"sasha gottfried" <> wrote in message
news:. ..
| "Microsoft may know HP, may know them VERY well - but Microsoft does not
| dictate something like how HP puts the OS onto a computer they
| manufacturer/sell/support."
|
| Somebody should be 'dictating' something to these clowns. Obviously neither
| HP nor Microsoft gives a damn about what customers have to go through when
| an update wreaks havoc! 3 weeks after the SP3 update, HP finally puts an
| update alert out on my computer. Duh......couldn't Microsoft have tested SP3
| on the HP/AMD computers in question and alerted HP? Couldn't HP have tested
| the update way before the release, considering they had access to it for
| months? Who are you protecting? I'd say a lawsuit might be the best update
| consumers can come up with! Take them both to court!
|
| MT
|
|
|
| "Shenan Stanley" <> wrote in message
| news:...
| > <snipped>
| >
| > Alias wrote:
| >> I'd say both MS and HP dropped the ball. MS has heard of HP, right?
| >> They know that HP is selling *their* operating system, right? Fact
| >> is that MS releases software to be tested by paying customers who
| >> don't even know they're testing it and that ain't right.
| >
| > HP has had access to SP3 for a LONG time. Longer than most consumers (and
| > they could have gotten BETAs anytime.)
| >
| > However - the fact is this is not about SP3 - it isn't even about any
| > patch that would have done the same thing...
| >
| > HP chose how they put the OS on their systems that they sell. They did
| > not use RIS, they did not use some unattended installation - they chose to
| > make an image (a single image) on one particular hardware set (Intel based
| > obviously) and apply it to all of their machines for some period of time.
| > Microsoft does not (and should not) have any say in how HP puts the OS on
| > the machine (what method is used to install it...) So - HP - given this
| > freedom chose as I pointed out and - in the end - it bit them.
| >
| > It's all about how the OS was installed. If the OS was installed from
| > CD/DVD through the normal means or through some unattended network process
| > (RIS, WDS, etc) or even if HP had made an image for AMD systems and Intel
| > systems seperately - this conversation (using HP sepecifically) would not
| > be happening. They (obviously) did none of those things (at least for a
| > time) and made one image on an Intel based system (which they can do if
| > they want) and in the end - that messed them up.
| >
| > Microsoft may know HP, may know them VERY well - but Microsoft does not
| > dictate something like how HP puts the OS onto a computer they
| > manufacturer/sell/support. ;-)
| >
| > --
| > Shenan Stanley
| > MS-MVP
| > --
| > How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
| > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
| >
|
|

sasha gottfried wrote:
> "Microsoft may know HP, may know them VERY well - but Microsoft
> does not dictate something like how HP puts the OS onto a computer
> they manufacturer/sell/support."
>
> Somebody should be 'dictating' something to these clowns. Obviously
> neither HP nor Microsoft gives a damn about what customers have to
> go through when an update wreaks havoc! 3 weeks after the SP3
> update, HP finally puts an update alert out on my computer.
> Duh......couldn't Microsoft have tested SP3 on the HP/AMD computers
> in question and alerted HP? Couldn't HP have tested the update way
> before the release, considering they had access to it for months?
> Who are you protecting? I'd say a lawsuit might be the best update
> consumers can come up with! Take them both to court!

So do it...

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html