ANova said:
What I said is based on personal experience.
Which is why I'm asking for actual data - you know, benchmarks and such. People have "personal experiences" with talking garden gnomes, it's doesn't therefore translate that we should fear an army of dimunitive tacky clay ornaments is lurking in gardening stores across the country, ready to strike at any moment.
Andecotal is not the plural of data.
I have played around with plenty of XP SP2 enabled pcs and I can see the difference.
I have played around with hundreds of XP SP2 enabled PC's at my former place of employment, and have applied it to 3 systems of my own and several friends machines. None of them noticed any difference in speed.
Considering your "evidence" countered.
Yes, you can retort (as you have been doing with parrot-like precision) that it's "just my opinion". Opinions however, are not created equally. To garner
respect for your opinion, it helps to base it on actual evidence. You have not done so.
While the amount of programs that have problems with SP2 may be at a point where it is no longer an issue, it is still a fact that SP2 causes general slowdown,
Oh, so it's a
fact now? I thought this was only your "opinion"?
If it is a fact, then please respond to my request and demonstrate some hard evidence to elevate this above the ramblings of your average troll, will you?
Think about it, don't you find it feasible that patching god knows how many files, changing their behavior as well as adding new ones could potentially break something and affect performance.
Think about it: Why are you the only who has noticed this when SP2 was put through the wringer from countless tech sites, network admins, and end users? If it is so obvious, why don't you simply craft a benchmark scenerio that can be replicated which will clearly demonstrate this phenomena that has somehow escaped the entire industry?
I mean it's only common sense
Depends on your neighbours I guess. You don't perhaps live near a halfway house do you?
and although one could argue the difference it doesn't change the fact that SP2 is not needed.
SP2 is sorely needed for the vast majority of the population. Even with careful users the security enhancements for IE alone make it worthwhile.
I have been running without any updates or service packs (except for SP1 because it was integrated into the installation cd) for more than 8 months now and have not once recieved any kind of malware, virus, spyware or trojan; not so much as a hint and I'm not even using an antivirus program.
This is just mind-boggingly ignorant. You must truly live in a constant state of bliss.
LOL, nice to see someone can build up so much hate for someone else over the dissagreement of an inanimate object.
It seems your definition of "hate" is about as grounded as your definition of "fact".
So, put up or shut up. Drop this bomb that will no doubt garner you considerable attention. Give us a benchmarking method that will demonstrate, once and for all, that your opinion has actual
merit, and thus can be respected.