Windows XP SP3 to come out next week?

At long last, Windows Vista Service Pack 1 started hitting PCs through Windows Update on Tuesday. We haven’t heard about Windows XP Service Pack 3 for a while, though. A release candidate version of SP3 came out in late February, but the final release of the service pack is still nowhere to be seen.

According to a report on ChannelWeb, however, users still clinging on to Windows XP shouldn’t be waiting much longer now. Quoting "at least one source," the report says Microsoft plans to release XP SP3 next Monday. In this instance, the source appears to be a pirate archive of SP3 pre-release build 5503, which is linked on BitTorrent tracker Mininova. The archive includes a file that says the 5503 build of SP3 passes Windows Genuine Advantage checks and adds that the final build is scheduled for March 24.

Still, ChannelWeb wasn’t able to get Microsoft to confirm or deny any particular schedule. The company maintains that XP SP3 will come out some time during the first half of this year, which could pin its release next week just as well as at the end of June.

Comments closed
    • Saber Cherry
    • 13 years ago

    (removed – misposted)

    • LoneWolf15
    • 13 years ago

    Can’t wait to be able to slipstream SP3 into Windows XP. I’m hoping this will add AHCI-mode drivers for most of Intel’s SATA controllers, in addition to all the patches we know will be there.

      • bthylafh
      • 13 years ago

      I’d be surprised if MS included any extra drivers. IIRC they’ve never done that before.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 13 years ago

      Yea I doubt we’ll see specific drivers integrated, you’ll still have to slipstream them in or nLite. Maybe they’ll add a few things to make installation simpler though, such as no need for a FLOPPY for those drivers.

    • Tarx
    • 13 years ago

    “cling”..?
    When 75% are still using Windows XP, that isn’t clinging.
    When Dell and other companies have forced MS to include that choice of OS to their business line of PCs.
    There is currently very little reason to switch.
    Let’s make a wild guess on how many of the 12% that are Vista users was just because it was already installed on their new PC (I’d guess 95%+).
    Yes MS will eventually succeed in migrating most people to Vista over time just by having it as the default system on most PCs sold, especially when Windows XP is no longer available for sale. And yes, they will lose a few % to Linux or OSX in the process.

    • grantmeaname
    • 13 years ago

    TechARP (in the ‘bread) just said second half of April.

    • 5150
    • 13 years ago

    Sooooo, anybody done this yet?

      • grantmeaname
      • 13 years ago

      I installed the beta a couple of months ago. I noticed no differences.

    • danny e.
    • 13 years ago

    this will make re-builds a lot easier.

    last weekend after installing SP2, I had around 91 security updates to take. install them all, reboot, and find there are another 20 to fix the fixes you just took. nice.

    in a side note, Vista has nothing to offer except 64bit-ness. The only reason I’m even considering Vista for my next OS is simply so I can run the 64bit version with more mem.

    Vista isnt really so much a release as it is an internal build that MS decided to sell as a release to pick up some extra cash till they have time to release the real vista. aka windows 7 ?

      • indeego
      • 13 years ago

      If you install IE7 before letting other updates install, it saves you a lot of updates/timeg{<.<}g Same with DX9.

      • sreams
      • 13 years ago

      Um… Vista is not an exclusive source of “64-bitness”. WindowsXP64 offers it as well.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 13 years ago

        Yeah, and terrible hardware support when compared to Vista. XP64 was an abortion.

    • Vrock
    • 13 years ago

    I’m a clinger, I guess. Oh well.

    • Dposcorp
    • 13 years ago

    Win2K is still though bomb, yo!

      • sreams
      • 13 years ago

      That’s an interesting spelling of the word “the”.

      • Krogoth
      • 13 years ago

      Excellent OS for non-64 bit era systems.

      Anything newer will reveal its age.

    • ssidbroadcast
    • 13 years ago

    Where’s the day’s shortbread?

    • albundy
    • 13 years ago

    “pirate archive of SP3 pre-release”?????? I thought the service packs were free? since when do we have to pay for them?

      • just brew it!
      • 13 years ago

      Even if SPs are free, leaked pre-release versions are still considered pirated. Someone had to violate an NDA for it to get out there, therefore it is an illegal copy.

        • Usacomp2k3
        • 13 years ago

        Exactly, which I’m a little disappointed that TR tells people directly where to go to steal it. That’s shameful.

          • Cyril
          • 13 years ago

          The source article mentions the location, so I didn’t think there was any real point to obscuring it. Those big BitTorrent trackers get mentioned in the news all the time.

          Besides, I think anyone actually willing to illegally download and run a pre-release service pack probably knows where to get it. Or they could just Google/Wiki “BitTorrent tracker.”

          • boing
          • 13 years ago

          ..as if that would be hard to find anyway, duh.

        • indeego
        • 13 years ago

        I think we need a different term when software/bits that are “free” are released on public nets. Pirated doesn’t quite fitg{<.<}g

          • UberGerbil
          • 13 years ago

          “Unauthorized distribution”?

            • evermore
            • 13 years ago

            I thought “leaked” worked pretty well.

          • GTVic
          • 13 years ago

          If it is the entire XP with SP3 integrated then “pirate” is the correct word. The first download I found was XP MCE with SP3 integrated.

    • maxxcool
    • 13 years ago

    “clinging” 0_o ??!?

      • just brew it!
      • 13 years ago

      Yeah, I raised an eyebrow at that too.

      Now Win2K users… *[

        • bthylafh
        • 13 years ago

        IMO die-hard 2K users are well into “smile and nod” territory by now.

          • indeego
          • 13 years ago

          Our GC Domain Controller still runs W2K. Happily, I might add. We have four workstations still running it as wellg{<.<}g

            • bthylafh
            • 13 years ago

            It’s more that W2K is barely being supported for security fixes, and that will stop in July 2010.

            And, too, these nutters who loudly proclaim that 2K was the best OS Microsoft ever released, etc.

            • Forge
            • 13 years ago

            I wouldn’t go so far as to call them ‘nutters’. If it weren’t for the lack of main lifecycle support, I have a few boxes here that would be running 2K. It was lighter and faster than XP by default, and while you can tweak and slim XP to 2K-like resource usage, you can tweak 2K far lower than that.

            Show me XP running nicely on a P2/333 with 128MB of ram and I’ll show you a machine that could have been happily running 2K even faster.

            It’s almost done for, though, I’ll give you that. The things that won’t be available on 2K/won’t run on 2K are already a pretty large list, and it’s only getting larger.

            • bthylafh
            • 13 years ago

            OK, I’ll trot out my uber-XP-laptop story again.

            Zenith PII/233 laptop with 160 MB of RAM, 2 GB hard drive, and Chips & Tech integrated graphics. Running XP SP2 and Office 2003 only, no antivirus, no Internet connection. Word and Excel could launch in 4 seconds, and bootup was surprisingly fast. XP wasn’t tweaked at all, and in fact didn’t have a video driver, so was using the generic SVGA one.

            So XP can be pretty good on crap hardware, as long as you don’t run AV and are careful about what you do.

        • Flying Fox
        • 13 years ago

        I recently set up a Win2K server VM just to serve TFTP to my diskless Folding VM. ๐Ÿ™‚

      • Krazeee
      • 13 years ago

      I read that and was thinking…uh…you’re kidding me right? There isn’t any reason /[

      • Flying Fox
      • 13 years ago

      I’m sure there are still some 98 users out there.

        • grantmeaname
        • 13 years ago

        There are still people on 3.1 out there.

          • Saber Cherry
          • 13 years ago

          I doubt it. Rebooting every few hours since 1990 is not not going to leave much hardware alive in 2008, and I doubt there are many 3.1 drivers floating around for anything you can buy today. So aside from people that don’t run any applications and dig up replacement parts out of trash heaps, no, I don’t think you’ll see much 3.1 any more.

      • StashTheVampede
      • 13 years ago

      Have relatives in Japan with a P3-550 and still running Windows ME! Damn thing is like a brick — none of the latest virii or trojans hit ME machines anymore.

      • ToeBot
      • 13 years ago

      That’s how I read it, the OS equivalent of a dingleberry, whoa is me.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This