if you are fine with SP1, just keep with it. Some people have reported that their system got slower after SP2 installing, and there is no direct benefit for Renoise (i.e.: there is no special compilation of Renoise for SP2) so, unless your system is unstable or insecure with SP1, you’re not obliged to install SP2
I’ve only installed SP2 because some microsoft apps forced me to, i’ld rather kept it to SP1 or even no SP at all, but there is already a majority of applications that depend on services (.Net) which requires SP1 as a minimum.
Uhm, I think most of us do. The problem with sticking to pre-SP2 patches is that you end up with a (more) buggy, unstable and vulnerable system. Most of SP2 overhead is the Security Center stuff which you can turn off anyway. Plus, you can also turn off the default firewall. But if you don’t have any other, don’t do that. Even if you’re on a LAN. That’s because other open Windows boxes on the LAN, once they catch some worm, will infect yours aswell.
well i dont really have any security concerns (knocked on desk), my only concern is getting my system to cooperate as best as possible with renoise.
so i started thinking that if i could optimize my system settings similar those used to create renoise, it would be at its best potential. it seems i spend more time battling my resources an troubleshooting problems than actual music making. i recently needed to reinstall xp an am trying to make it as light as possible, with little to no frills at all, no fw or anti virii, cuz it is being handled redundantly by other machines.
just trying to streamline this thing really, an was really wondering about instaling sp2.
it seems sp2 is getting close to my 3 year rule of not using technology until
its proved itself. an i also noticed theres some patches in it that might be related to some of my problems with renoise loading really slow.
with just a few minor optimizations to xp,
since this last update (b5) renoise is running magnificent.
so i think i will hold off on sp2 for now unless advised too.
If you take your PC to a LAN you should always turn on all those security measures.
I’ve already seen worms and virusses sneaking into company LANs because some jerk-managers never update their antivirus software on their laptops, yet keep it vulnerable to various unpatched holes at home on their whatever broadband type connection by stupidly configuring their modems to run in bridged mode.
They come back loaded on the network and the first thing that happens is network congestion because all the worms start spreading themselves like hell to infect unpatched machines.
Fortunately modern switches, routers and pix modules can already be loaded with an antivirus module (if the antivir company supports those devices) and catch the disease in the tubes before even reaching anything that could do the same job yet.
There is not much wrong with SP2 secure-wise, but it is bulky and many overhead process eat your memory and cpu time if your PC is standing in a stand-alone environment.
And as you said:the internal firewall is best being turned off when not in a LAN, this already indicates it is a nuisance for home use, specially because it requires configuring your ports for many p2p-like applications (games, filesharing etc).
The newer security updates are a nuisance as well… take the new filetransport option in MSN… they now require you to install a by Microsoft certified antivirus application. I have Norton AV 7.x but it doesn’t detect it. As a result, every downloaded file through msn on my machine is being stamped as “potentially harmfull” and being removed as soon as you close that dialog. It doesn’ matter what extention the file has, even safe .txt files are being erased.
If i figure out which security patch does this, i remove it immediately.