XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

[Guest ClueLess]

Hi All

 

I see many posts stating that SP3 can be installed only after applying

either SP1 or SP2

 

I have already successfully slipstreamed SP3 on XP-SP2 and made a

fresh install which went smoothly, no problems.

 

Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

 

Since I have no spare hard disk I did not try to install it and see if

there is a problem.

 

Having slipstreamed I believe there should be no problem. I will get a

new hard disk and install this weekend and come back.

 

Meantime if anyone has more information please respond.

 

--

Thanks for your time and attention

 

ClueLess

[Guest Big Al]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

ClueLess wrote:

> Hi All

>

> I see many posts stating that SP3 can be installed only after applying

> either SP1 or SP2

>

> I have already successfully slipstreamed SP3 on XP-SP2 and made a

> fresh install which went smoothly, no problems.

>

> Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

> with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

> update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>

> Since I have no spare hard disk I did not try to install it and see if

> there is a problem.

>

> Having slipstreamed I believe there should be no problem. I will get a

> new hard disk and install this weekend and come back.

>

> Meantime if anyone has more information please respond.

>

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsxp/cc164204.aspx

This article says you have to have SP1 at least. And oddly it

recommends SP2 installed. But that now runs totally against the grain

of logic (to me at least).

 

But I'd sure like to see it in more plain English like you said.

[Guest Thee Chicago Wolf]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

>I see many posts stating that SP3 can be installed only after applying

>either SP1 or SP2

>

>I have already successfully slipstreamed SP3 on XP-SP2 and made a

>fresh install which went smoothly, no problems.

>

>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>

>Since I have no spare hard disk I did not try to install it and see if

>there is a problem.

>

>Having slipstreamed I believe there should be no problem. I will get a

>new hard disk and install this weekend and come back.

>

>Meantime if anyone has more information please respond.

 

I think the logic for original retail CD is that you first slipstream

SP1 into it and then SP3 into it. But if it works for you, maybe you

just got lucky.

 

- Thee Chicago Wolf

[Guest PD43]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

 

Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

slipstreamed disc?

 

There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

recommended.

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Correct. The blocker is programmed into the herald file that starts the

download of the main SP3 file on Windows Update. The standalone does not

contain the herald file and so does display a blocker.

 

Further, nLite works just fine. It does not know that it is creating a cd

that will install a defective OS. It just does what you tell it too.

 

The problems do not appear until you use the slipstreamed cd to install the

OS or repair it.

 

So don't use XP Gold to create an integrated XP SP3 cd. Just don't. The

SP1 and SP2 installers made certain changes to XP Gold kernel files quite

apart from any updates before or since. However, these changes are NOT done

by the SP3 installer. That means critical changes aren't made to XP Gold at

the time SP3 is applied that are made if you upgrade XP Gold to SP1 or SP2

and then use that as a base for slipstreaming with SP3.

 

I have no idea why MS did not provide for that in SP3 but they did say that

they did not during the SP3 beta program and said not to use XP Gold for

slipsteaming. I suppose it could have something to do with changes to XP's

servicing stack back around SP1 but I am just speculating.

 

Unfortunately, the SP3 beta newsgroups are no longer on the betanews servers

so I cannot go back and capture the quotes for you.

 

"ClueLess" <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote in message

news:3o0e24trdetvk0c4hj0lig70m8aek82dei@4ax.com...

> Hi All

>

> I see many posts stating that SP3 can be installed only after applying

> either SP1 or SP2

>

> I have already successfully slipstreamed SP3 on XP-SP2 and made a

> fresh install which went smoothly, no problems.

>

> Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

> with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

> update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>

> Since I have no spare hard disk I did not try to install it and see if

> there is a problem.

>

> Having slipstreamed I believe there should be no problem. I will get a

> new hard disk and install this weekend and come back.

>

> Meantime if anyone has more information please respond.

>

> --

> Thanks for your time and attention

>

> ClueLess

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this thread. I'm

sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the team said

slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that would install a

defective XP.

 

"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

> ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>

>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>

> Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

> slipstreamed disc?

>

> There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

> recommended.

[Guest PD43]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

"Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote:

>There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this thread. I'm

>sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the team said

>slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that would install a

>defective XP.

 

It seems to be a "common sense" thing to me - and I like to play

around with my system (just checked my Vista services settings with

Black Viper's "tweaked"- I only found three settings I could stop that

I hadn't stopped).

 

That said, why anyone would try something when slipstreaming that

isn't recommended is beyond my comprehension.

>

>"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

>news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

>> ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>

>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>

>> Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>> slipstreamed disc?

>>

>> There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>> recommended.

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

There is a resistance to advice given in a newsgroup by the old heads. It's

like "if I don't understand it then it must not be true."

 

"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:qhke249l6pvanovmgju7ehme8qulthavdk@4ax.com...

> "Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote:

>

>>There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this thread.

>>I'm

>>sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the team said

>>slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that would install

>>a

>>defective XP.

>

> It seems to be a "common sense" thing to me - and I like to play

> around with my system (just checked my Vista services settings with

> Black Viper's "tweaked"- I only found three settings I could stop that

> I hadn't stopped).

>

> That said, why anyone would try something when slipstreaming that

> isn't recommended is beyond my comprehension.

>>

>>"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

>>news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

>>> ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>>

>>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>>

>>> Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>>> slipstreamed disc?

>>>

>>> There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>>> recommended.

[Guest ANONYMOUS]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

The article you refer to is all about "INSTALLING Windows XP Service

Pack 3 (SP3)". The operative word is Installing here NOT SLIPSTREAMING

or EMBEDDING.

 

I have done it and it does install without problems. The only

difference is that you need to provide the product key during

installation procedure rather than have the option to defer entering it

after it is complete.

 

hth

 

 

Big Al wrote:

> ClueLess wrote:

>

>> Hi All

>>

>> I see many posts stating that SP3 can be installed only after applying

>> either SP1 or SP2

>>

>> I have already successfully slipstreamed SP3 on XP-SP2 and made a

>> fresh install which went smoothly, no problems.

>>

>> Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>> with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>> update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>

>> Since I have no spare hard disk I did not try to install it and see if

>> there is a problem.

>>

>> Having slipstreamed I believe there should be no problem. I will get a

>> new hard disk and install this weekend and come back.

>>

>> Meantime if anyone has more information please respond.

>>

> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsxp/cc164204.aspx

> This article says you have to have SP1 at least. And oddly it

> recommends SP2 installed. But that now runs totally against the

> grain of logic (to me at least).

>

> But I'd sure like to see it in more plain English like you said.

[Guest ANONYMOUS]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Where is your source on the web? It is completely wrong to say it will

produce defective XP. Unless you have tried it you can't write anything

erroneous like you have just done. I have tried it, compared the files

with those produced by SP2 integrated with SP3. There is no difference

what so ever except that dates on files of original XP were 2001.

 

hth

 

 

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this

> thread. I'm sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the

> team said slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that

> would install a defective XP.

>

> "PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

> news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

>

>> ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>

>>> Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>> with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>> update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>

>>

>> Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>> slipstreamed disc?

>>

>> There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>> recommended.

>

>

[Guest ANONYMOUS]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Where does it say that "SP1 is required" when slipstreaming or embedding

a windows share? You are all joining the band wagon of Colin Barnhorst

[c.barnhorst@comcast.net] who hasn't tried it or tested it but is quite

happy to give erroneous advise on these newsgroups. One should try it

before giving advice or advise on these public newsgroups or provide

links to their source.

 

hth

 

 

 

 

 

PD43 wrote:

>ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>

>

>

>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>

>>

>

>Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>slipstreamed disc?

>

>There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>recommended.

>

>

[Guest PD43]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

ANONYMOUS <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote:

>Where does it say that "SP1 is required" when slipstreaming or embedding

>a windows share? You are all joining the band wagon of Colin Barnhorst

>[c.barnhorst@comcast.net] who hasn't tried it or tested it but is quite

>happy to give erroneous advise on these newsgroups. One should try it

>before giving advice or advise on these public newsgroups or provide

>links to their source.

 

Just ran an extensive search using Google, and it would appear that

you are entirely correct.

 

There is nothing in the MS Knowledge Base against it, and there are

enough sites saying it can be done and giving instructions that it

would definitely appear that it can be done.

 

The only "problems" seems to be related to having to use your

installation key when using the slipstreamed disc. Hardly a problem.

[Guest ANONYMOUS]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Thank you very much. You can ignore my last message as you have now

answered it.

 

Thanks once again.

 

Regards,

 

 

PD43 wrote:

>ANONYMOUS <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote:

>

>

>

>>Where does it say that "SP1 is required" when slipstreaming or embedding

>>a windows share? You are all joining the band wagon of Colin Barnhorst

>>[c.barnhorst@comcast.net] who hasn't tried it or tested it but is quite

>>happy to give erroneous advise on these newsgroups. One should try it

>>before giving advice or advise on these public newsgroups or provide

>>links to their source.

>>

>>

>

>Just ran an extensive search using Google, and it would appear that

>you are entirely correct.

>

>There is nothing in the MS Knowledge Base against it, and there are

>enough sites saying it can be done and giving instructions that it

>would definitely appear that it can be done.

>

>The only "problems" seems to be related to having to use your

>installation key when using the slipstreamed disc. Hardly a problem.

>

>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Haven't tried it? You're joking. I have been making slipstreamed copies of

XP SP3 since the onset of beta 2 last year. I have installed XP SP3 from

integrated cds in all combinations of Gold, SP1, and SP2 and with Home and

Pro during that time. The subject came up several times in the beta ng and

several of us beta testers tried to argue with the beta team about not being

able to break down where the differences in the kernel files were. The team

stuck to their guns so I am defering to what the folks who make XP said.

 

"ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

news:OCbfrI7sIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Where does it say that "SP1 is required" when slipstreaming or embedding a

> windows share? You are all joining the band wagon of Colin Barnhorst

> [c.barnhorst@comcast.net] who hasn't tried it or tested it but is quite

> happy to give erroneous advise on these newsgroups. One should try it

> before giving advice or advise on these public newsgroups or provide links

> to their source.

>

> hth

>

>

>

>

>

> PD43 wrote:

>

>>ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>>

>>

>>Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>>slipstreamed disc?

>>

>>There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>>recommended.

>>

[Guest ANONYMOUS]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

 

 

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> Haven't tried it? You're joking. I have been making slipstreamed

> copies of XP SP3 since the onset of beta 2 last year. I have

> installed XP SP3 from integrated cds in all combinations of Gold, SP1,

> and SP2 and with Home and Pro during that time. The subject came up

> several times in the beta ng and several of us beta testers tried to

> argue with the beta team about not being able to break down where the

> differences in the kernel files were. The team stuck to their guns so

> I am defering to what the folks who make XP said.

>

>

This is where your misunderstanding is exposed. When you embed a

windows share, you are simply copying and replacing the relevant files.

Now if you are talking about kernel files, there is no reason why the

process of embedding cannot copy over the old kernel files. It is like

copying a new word file over old files. If the file isn't in use, it

can be copied and replaced; but if it is in use , it can't. No wonder

you can't install SP3 over GOLD version of XP already running but this

does not mean you can't embed a SP3 on a windows share.

 

Hope this clarifies my position.

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

All of the XP service packs have written changes to kernel files in addition

to removing and replacing files. By far the bulk of the changes are the

replacement of files not already updated by WU, but when you look at the

changes to functionalities in the various release notes you will see that at

least a few modifications were made that were not made by any update before

or after the service pack release and cannot be replicated by simply being

up to date with all the updates released prior to the release of the service

pack. That's one of the reasons a service pack is more than a rollup.

 

"ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

news:%23S4wsc7sIHA.5832@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>

>

> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>

>> Haven't tried it? You're joking. I have been making slipstreamed copies

>> of XP SP3 since the onset of beta 2 last year. I have installed XP SP3

>> from integrated cds in all combinations of Gold, SP1, and SP2 and with

>> Home and Pro during that time. The subject came up several times in the

>> beta ng and several of us beta testers tried to argue with the beta team

>> about not being able to break down where the differences in the kernel

>> files were. The team stuck to their guns so I am defering to what the

>> folks who make XP said.

>>

>>

> This is where your misunderstanding is exposed. When you embed a windows

> share, you are simply copying and replacing the relevant files. Now if

> you are talking about kernel files, there is no reason why the process of

> embedding cannot copy over the old kernel files. It is like copying a

> new word file over old files. If the file isn't in use, it can be copied

> and replaced; but if it is in use , it can't. No wonder you can't

> install SP3 over GOLD version of XP already running but this does not mean

> you can't embed a SP3 on a windows share.

> Hope this clarifies my position.

>

>

>

[Guest anon]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Would it be safe and possible to create aslipstreamed disk using XP-Pro Gold

and SP-2 and then slipstream Sp-3 to that?

"Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:36FBF721-0493-4EBF-9A37-8C4AA5343E7E@microsoft.com...

> All of the XP service packs have written changes to kernel files in

> addition to removing and replacing files. By far the bulk of the changes

> are the replacement of files not already updated by WU, but when you look

> at the changes to functionalities in the various release notes you will

> see that at least a few modifications were made that were not made by any

> update before or after the service pack release and cannot be replicated

> by simply being up to date with all the updates released prior to the

> release of the service pack. That's one of the reasons a service pack is

> more than a rollup.

>

> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

> news:%23S4wsc7sIHA.5832@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>

>>

>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>

>>> Haven't tried it? You're joking. I have been making slipstreamed

>>> copies of XP SP3 since the onset of beta 2 last year. I have installed

>>> XP SP3 from integrated cds in all combinations of Gold, SP1, and SP2 and

>>> with Home and Pro during that time. The subject came up several times

>>> in the beta ng and several of us beta testers tried to argue with the

>>> beta team about not being able to break down where the differences in

>>> the kernel files were. The team stuck to their guns so I am defering to

>>> what the folks who make XP said.

>>>

>>>

>> This is where your misunderstanding is exposed. When you embed a windows

>> share, you are simply copying and replacing the relevant files. Now if

>> you are talking about kernel files, there is no reason why the process of

>> embedding cannot copy over the old kernel files. It is like copying a

>> new word file over old files. If the file isn't in use, it can be copied

>> and replaced; but if it is in use , it can't. No wonder you can't

>> install SP3 over GOLD version of XP already running but this does not

>> mean you can't embed a SP3 on a windows share.

>> Hope this clarifies my position.

>>

>>

>>

>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Absolutely.

 

"anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote in message

news:OEVO7%23$sIHA.420@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Would it be safe and possible to create aslipstreamed disk using XP-Pro

> Gold and SP-2 and then slipstream Sp-3 to that?

> "Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote in message

> news:36FBF721-0493-4EBF-9A37-8C4AA5343E7E@microsoft.com...

>> All of the XP service packs have written changes to kernel files in

>> addition to removing and replacing files. By far the bulk of the changes

>> are the replacement of files not already updated by WU, but when you look

>> at the changes to functionalities in the various release notes you will

>> see that at least a few modifications were made that were not made by any

>> update before or after the service pack release and cannot be replicated

>> by simply being up to date with all the updates released prior to the

>> release of the service pack. That's one of the reasons a service pack is

>> more than a rollup.

>>

>> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@EXAMPLE.COM> wrote in message

>> news:%23S4wsc7sIHA.5832@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>>

>>>

>>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>>

>>>> Haven't tried it? You're joking. I have been making slipstreamed

>>>> copies of XP SP3 since the onset of beta 2 last year. I have installed

>>>> XP SP3 from integrated cds in all combinations of Gold, SP1, and SP2

>>>> and with Home and Pro during that time. The subject came up several

>>>> times in the beta ng and several of us beta testers tried to argue with

>>>> the beta team about not being able to break down where the differences

>>>> in the kernel files were. The team stuck to their guns so I am

>>>> defering to what the folks who make XP said.

>>>>

>>>>

>>> This is where your misunderstanding is exposed. When you embed a

>>> windows share, you are simply copying and replacing the relevant files.

>>> Now if you are talking about kernel files, there is no reason why the

>>> process of embedding cannot copy over the old kernel files. It is like

>>> copying a new word file over old files. If the file isn't in use, it

>>> can be copied and replaced; but if it is in use , it can't. No wonder

>>> you can't install SP3 over GOLD version of XP already running but this

>>> does not mean you can't embed a SP3 on a windows share.

>>> Hope this clarifies my position.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>

>

[Guest Frank-FL]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

 

"Big Al" <BigAl@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:xZDVj.3527$5b3.360@trnddc05...

> ClueLess wrote:

>> Hi All

>>

>> I see many posts stating that SP3 can be installed only after applying

>> either SP1 or SP2

>>

>> I have already successfully slipstreamed SP3 on XP-SP2 and made a

>> fresh install which went smoothly, no problems.

>>

>> Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>> with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>> update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>

>> Since I have no spare hard disk I did not try to install it and see if

>> there is a problem.

>>

>> Having slipstreamed I believe there should be no problem. I will get a

>> new hard disk and install this weekend and come back.

>>

>> Meantime if anyone has more information please respond.

>>

> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsxp/cc164204.aspx

> This article says you have to have SP1 at least. And oddly it

> recommends SP2 installed. But that now runs totally against the grain

> of logic (to me at least).

>

> But I'd sure like to see it in more plain English like you said.

 

This page says different.

 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=68C48DAD-BC34-40BE-8D85-6BB4F56F5110&displaylang=en#filelist

[Guest Frank-FL]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

 

"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message news:qhke249l6pvanovmgju7ehme8qulthavdk@4ax.com...

> "Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote:

>

>>There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this thread. I'm

>>sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the team said

>>slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that would install a

>>defective XP.

>

> It seems to be a "common sense" thing to me - and I like to play

> around with my system (just checked my Vista services settings with

> Black Viper's "tweaked"- I only found three settings I could stop that

> I hadn't stopped).

>

> That said, why anyone would try something when slipstreaming that

> isn't recommended is beyond my comprehension.

>>

>>"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

>>news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

>>> ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>>

>>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>>

>>> Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>>> slipstreamed disc?

>>>

>>> There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>>> recommended.

 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=68C48DAD-BC34-40BE-8D85-6BB4F56F5110&displaylang=en#filelist

 

System Requirements

a.. Supported Operating Systems: Windows XP; Windows XP Home Edition ; Windows XP Home Edition N; Windows XP Media Center Edition; Windows XP Professional Edition ; Windows XP Professional N; Windows XP Service Pack 1; Windows XP Service Pack 2; Windows XP Starter Edition; Windows XP Tablet PC Edition

Windows® XP

[Guest Bob I]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

 

 

Frank-FL wrote:

> "Big Al" <BigAl@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:xZDVj.3527$5b3.360@trnddc05...

>

>>ClueLess wrote:

>>

>>>Hi All

>>>

>>>I see many posts stating that SP3 can be installed only after applying

>>>either SP1 or SP2

>>>

>>>I have already successfully slipstreamed SP3 on XP-SP2 and made a

>>>fresh install which went smoothly, no problems.

>>>

>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>>

>>>Since I have no spare hard disk I did not try to install it and see if

>>>there is a problem.

>>>

>>>Having slipstreamed I believe there should be no problem. I will get a

>>>new hard disk and install this weekend and come back.

>>>

>>>Meantime if anyone has more information please respond.

>>>

>>

>>http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsxp/cc164204.aspx

>>This article says you have to have SP1 at least. And oddly it

>>recommends SP2 installed. But that now runs totally against the grain

>>of logic (to me at least).

>>

>>But I'd sure like to see it in more plain English like you said.

>

>

> This page says different.

>

> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=68C48DAD-BC34-40BE-8D85-6BB4F56F5110&displaylang=en#filelist

 

BUT, if you actually read the contents of one the files at the link you

posted, it says:

 

Fundamentally, deploying Windows XP SP3 works the same as deploying SP1

and SP2 for Windows XP:

- SP3 is cumulative, so users can install SP3 on top of Windows XP SP1

or SP2.

- Windows XP SP3 supports the same languages as Windows XP did in its

initial release.

- You can run the SP3 update package on any edition of Windows XP SP1 or

SP2. For example, you can

run the SP3 update package on a computer running the Windows XP Media

Center Edition with SP1. The

exceptions are Embedded editions for XP wh

Overview of Windows XP Service Pack 3.

[Guest Bob I]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

 

 

Frank-FL wrote:

> "PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message news:qhke249l6pvanovmgju7ehme8qulthavdk@4ax.com...

>

>>"Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote:

>>

>>

>>>There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this thread. I'm

>>>sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the team said

>>>slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that would install a

>>>defective XP.

>>

>>It seems to be a "common sense" thing to me - and I like to play

>>around with my system (just checked my Vista services settings with

>>Black Viper's "tweaked"- I only found three settings I could stop that

>>I hadn't stopped).

>>

>>That said, why anyone would try something when slipstreaming that

>>isn't recommended is beyond my comprehension.

>>

>>>"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

>>>news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

>>>

>>>>ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>>>

>>>>Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>>>>slipstreamed disc?

>>>>

>>>>There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>>>>recommended.

>

>

> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=68C48DAD-BC34-40BE-8D85-6BB4F56F5110&displaylang=en#filelist

>

> System Requirements

> a.. Supported Operating Systems: Windows XP; Windows XP Home Edition ; Windows XP Home Edition N; Windows XP Media Center Edition; Windows XP Professional Edition ; Windows XP Professional N; Windows XP Service Pack 1; Windows XP Service Pack 2; Windows XP Starter Edition; Windows XP Tablet PC Edition

> Windows® XP

 

Read the actual documentation at the links in that page.

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

However, more details in the linked documentation exclude anything before XP

SP1.

 

"Frank-FL" <bbunny@bqik.net> wrote in message

news:uZEhpbRtIHA.1872@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

 

"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:qhke249l6pvanovmgju7ehme8qulthavdk@4ax.com...

> "Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote:

>

>>There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this thread.

>>I'm

>>sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the team said

>>slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that would install

>>a

>>defective XP.

>

> It seems to be a "common sense" thing to me - and I like to play

> around with my system (just checked my Vista services settings with

> Black Viper's "tweaked"- I only found three settings I could stop that

> I hadn't stopped).

>

> That said, why anyone would try something when slipstreaming that

> isn't recommended is beyond my comprehension.

>>

>>"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

>>news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

>>> ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>>

>>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>>

>>> Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>>> slipstreamed disc?

>>>

>>> There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>>> recommended.

 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=68C48DAD-BC34-40BE-8D85-6BB4F56F5110&displaylang=en#filelist

 

System Requirements

a.. Supported Operating Systems: Windows XP; Windows XP Home Edition ;

Windows XP Home Edition N; Windows XP Media Center Edition; Windows XP

Professional Edition ; Windows XP Professional N; Windows XP Service Pack 1;

Windows XP Service Pack 2; Windows XP Starter Edition; Windows XP Tablet PC

Edition

Windows® XP

[Guest DevilsPGD]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

In message <eGfYaaRtIHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "Frank-FL"

<bbunny@bqik.net> wrote:

>This page says different.

>

>http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=68C48DAD-BC34-40BE-8D85-6BB4F56F5110&displaylang=en#filelist

 

The deployment section is clear that upgrading from SP1 and SP2 is

supported:

 

"SP3 is cumulative, so users can install SP3 on top of Windows XP SP1 or

SP2." and "You can run the SP3 update package on any edition of Windows

XP SP1 or SP2"

 

I skimmed and didn't see anything about XP RTM, either for or against.

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XP Pro (Gold?) and SP3

 

Nevertheless, when the user attempts to use WU to update anthing before XP

SP1 he is blocked with the error message that the minimum requirement is

SP1.

 

"Frank-FL" <bbunny@bqik.net> wrote in message

news:uZEhpbRtIHA.1872@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

 

"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:qhke249l6pvanovmgju7ehme8qulthavdk@4ax.com...

> "Colin Barnhorst" <c.barnhorst@comcast.net> wrote:

>

>>There is, according to the SP3 beta team. See my reply in this thread.

>>I'm

>>sure I don't have it 100% correct but I am sure that the team said

>>slipstreaming on XP Gold would produce an integrated cd that would install

>>a

>>defective XP.

>

> It seems to be a "common sense" thing to me - and I like to play

> around with my system (just checked my Vista services settings with

> Black Viper's "tweaked"- I only found three settings I could stop that

> I hadn't stopped).

>

> That said, why anyone would try something when slipstreaming that

> isn't recommended is beyond my comprehension.

>>

>>"PD43" <pauld1943@comcast.net> wrote in message

>>news:cn5e24p8afouv8ickjm3a96nanm8gfisg3@4ax.com...

>>> ClueLess <clueless@wilderness.org.invalid> wrote:

>>>

>>>>Today I tried with my original XP Pro (Retail) and the slipstreaming

>>>>with nLite went without any warning or hitch. That means, AFAICS,

>>>>update.exe did not check whether XP was with either SP1 or SP2.

>>>

>>> Yes, but are you SURE that you now have SP1 and SP2 files on that

>>> slipstreamed disc?

>>>

>>> There must be a good reason why SP1 is required and SP2 is

>>> recommended.

 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=68C48DAD-BC34-40BE-8D85-6BB4F56F5110&displaylang=en#filelist

 

System Requirements

a.. Supported Operating Systems: Windows XP; Windows XP Home Edition ;

Windows XP Home Edition N; Windows XP Media Center Edition; Windows XP

Professional Edition ; Windows XP Professional N; Windows XP Service Pack 1;

Windows XP Service Pack 2; Windows XP Starter Edition; Windows XP Tablet PC

Edition

Windows® XP