a local "hosts" file

[dedndave]

not at all   :red
i am not talking about automatic updates (although i disable that, also)
i am talking about going to update.microsoft.com and letting it update your machine
i may use the site to get a list of hotfixes, but i install them individually

[sinsi]

i am not talking about automatic updates (although i disable that, also)
i am talking about going to update.microsoft.com and letting it update your machine

For XP and earlier there is no difference, unless you mean the express and custom buttons.

I disable auto updates too but still check every week and install all of the criticals.
One thing I've noticed is that auto update won't offer some of the recommended ones, several of which I install.
It won't offer hardware updates either.

I am talking of the usual clueless luser here.

[MichaelW]

I've never had a problem with letting Microsoft select and install critical updates; it always works. But then I always go with the recommendations and never select and install updates manually, because I would expect that to upset their system.

[dedndave]

all i can say is....
you guys must be used to your machine running slow
if you built your hard drive that way, your computer is not running as fast as it could
if there is a delay between the time you click on a program to open it and the time it is on your display, you did it wrong   :bg

@sinsi
to see hardware updates offered by the site, you  have to click "Hardware Updates" in the left-hand pane
in fact, the update site is one of two ways i know of to correctly install KB911895 (without using automatic updates)
i have managed to download the file, but it is a CAB file with hardware drivers
i tried installing it the way we usually install hardware drivers, but that does not correctly install the two devices
for a while, i was using update.microsoft.com to install that one update
i found a simpler way to do it is to install IntelliType Pro 7.1 (for MS wireless keyboards)
that takes care of it for me
i may take some time to figure out how to do it manually

another hardware update you may see is KB888111, if you have realtek sound (common on many intel m/b's)

[locche]

@michael: certainly a firewall. Without one perhaps 16 bit you might carry on.  I was actually on the rave becaue I lost 500 lines or so of basic on the Electron because it didn't record properly and I hit the damned break. Painful. Nevertheless, service packs bring "good" as dave suggests, but they bring "pain" as well if one is not carefull. I did an update once on 2000 for the 2003 server ddk. But then the circus began. Windows began acting like a cheap XP. I removed it all and never looked  back. On the other hand I never attained the driver schooling I had sought.  But with a decent firewall, common sense, and a minimum of greed, one can avoid the service pack tour. At least I have lived to tell of it.
@whoever As dave has pointed out, the service packs contain cabs, so that generally one can obtain what one needs and leave the rest for those that can't be bothered. For me 2000 pro remains the choice OS.  But my interest lie in programming, not in usb cameras, sound cards, etc.. Anyone using such devices will definely have it easier w/XP.  But if one doesn't require the snickschnack, then I mainten 2000 pro to be  more pleasurable.

[MichaelW]

I also prefer 2000 Pro, but the updates stop in 6 days so soon I wll need to move to XP.

[ecube]

abit offtopic but you guys should try peerblock, it's peerguardian with lot of bug fixes, and a new team working on it. Free, stable and even has their driver signed so win7 works fine, I use it to block hundred of millions of ips.

[Queue]

I also prefer 2000 Pro, but the updates stop in 6 days so soon I wll need to move to XP.

That makes sense how? Win2000 won't spontaneously stop working when Microsoft stops providing updates, and 2000 will potentially develop a community that makes unofficial patches the way Win9x has.

Extended support for Win9x ended July 11, 2006, and since then, support for drives larger than 128 GB (48-bit LBA), support for RAM above Win9x limits, support for USB storage devices, limited support for newer video cards, enhanced resource handle management (via RP9, what used to be one of the 9x line's biggest limitations), kernel addtions to support modern Windows API additions (via KernelEx), and adaptations of various Microsoft updates for things like IE6, etc. to use on 9x, have all been done by the Win9x user community.

My favorite version of Windows was 98SE, so I keep one machine running on it, can run modern software on it and use modern hard drives in it thanks to the user community (well, and thanks to a PCI SATA card). My other machines run XP. If 2000 has half the following 9x has (which I'm sure it has more), it should endure for quite a while.

Queue

[MichaelW]

I should have specified that it's the critical updates that are coming to an end, the other updates ended years ago. Even behind a firewall a system with known vulnerabilities is a problem unless you are extremely careful where you go and what you do. I don't wish to be that careful, and I don't want to go the disk image route, so I'll switch my primary system to something I can easily keep updated. It won't cost me anything but an hour or so of my time. I fully expect to keep using Windows 2000 on other systems that are not connected to the Internet or where it doesn't matter if they get hammered. And I still use Windows 98 FE (more permissive that SE) on systems where I run DOS apps, but it just does not have the stability of Windows 2000 and later.

[locche]

@queue:   I gave your proxy method a try, and it works fine. Thanks again. The only thing I don't like is that FF gives this nasty "host using a proxy message" , which is fine for trouble shooting, but sometimes undesirable. I found another way, at least for FF.
In the Profiles directory there is a file 'hostperm1' or you may create it. It uses following syntax:
host   document   2   doubleclick.net
host   cookie             2       globaltrack.com
host   image              2       adtrack.net   
etc...                      At any rate, the user is then presented with a fine, blank page when attempting to access site. So that may be something to try.
Regards

[dedndave]

win2000 and xp are fairly good OS's with all the current updates applied
i will admit, it isn't easy to know which ones to apply - lol
but, they have had time to find all the little bugs
eventually, there will be more hotfixes for win 7, too
the difference is... they haven't found them yet   :P

[GregL]

I've never had a problem with letting Microsoft select and install critical  updates; it always works.

Same here.

I always keep up-to-date on everything, OS, updates, browser etc.  It has always worked well for me.

[dedndave]

the OS is functional, either way
i hate to say this (  :P ), but you won't know if you've had problems or not until you've tried it both ways
i build my OS "manually" because the end result is a faster build
i wouldn't go to all that trouble for nothing