"Steven Schveighoffer" <schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:op.vsvckfcpeav7ka@steve-laptop... > On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:02:05 -0400, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> > wrote: > >> Given that the other posts list XP with having 23:00 on the day before >> rather >> than at 00:00 for the dates in the middle, it looks like XP has the same >> behavior as XP. However, it looks like whatever time zone you have your >> computer in (if it's really the same as New York, it would Eastern >> Daylight >> Time at the moment) is not actually EST/EDT proper (either that or the >> two >> other posts with XP are on SP3 while you're on SP2 and changes were made >> in >> SP3 which affect the Windows functions being called). Glancing at the >> list of >> Windows time zones though, I don't see any cities which would currently >> would >> be in normal Eastern time but would have been in a slightly different >> time >> zone (e.g. no DST) prior to 2007. I _thought_ that some of Indiana was >> that >> way, but if so, they didn't get a special time zone for it in Windows. > > IIRC, there was a large problem when the time zone changes were enacted > for XP. I remember originally Microsoft was NOT going to update XP unless > you wanted to pay them some ridiculous amount (something like $10k) for a > patch. However, there were numerous tools that could be used to edit the > time zone information. > > So they eventually did update XP (must be they got raided by the common > sense police). I would highly suspect that Nick's system isn't updated > since it's at SP2 (I'm pretty sure the original SP2 was pre- the timezone > changes) and Microsoft typically stops releasing patches for an older > service pack when a new one comes out. > > Nick, you really should update to SP3, there literally is no down side, > except the time it takes to update, and then apply the subsequent patches > that have been released since SP3. >
Hypothetically speaking, if a person was on an unauthorized version of XP SP2, then they would be blocked from installing SP3 (since the SP3 update requires validation that it's a legitimate copy of XP). Since MS no longer offers legitimate copies of XP and the Windows licenses are non-transferable, such an immoral person would, as far as I'm aware, be stuck with SP2. Hypothetically speaking, of course.
