For marketing reasons some of the manufacturers of software will want you to think their service packs or download updates are for security reasons. They are trying to hide the fact that it is very expensive to thoroughly test software and in a competitive environment they send their software out too soon so that the user can test it. So my best guess is that 90% and at times 100% of the service pack is bug fixes. There may at times be some small feature enhancements. We have no way of proving this since many bugs we do not experience. The better software manufacturers are transparent and publish a list of their fixes (this is smarter marketing because it also markets their software company as being honest and trustworthy). I would guess that service packs 2 and 3 fix bugs created by the attempts at fixes in service pack 1 which create new problems. That is the reality of programming. Why does this occur? Because programs are extremely complex. It becomes even harder to fix bugs for the company if they have a high programmer turnover since it takes a long time to learn a complex program and putting in fixes when you do not have a 100% knowledge of the program is risky (been there done that). Many years ago I read that Microsoft is a sweatshop (typically these create high turnover). I can not prove this but judging from the fact that their software quality is going downhill (file find is no where near as good as in XP, backup is no where as good as in XP) I suspect what I read may in fact be true.

I will agree that Lunix is good and MS-windows is good. Windows would be better if they followed the procedure in the above post. The fact that they no longer do what I describe in the above post is more proof in my mind that they are going down hill. They are struggling to keep ahead of Google and Linux.

Last edited by bowlesj; 06/09/18 02:44 AM.
John Bowles
My playing in my 20s:
https://www.reverbnation.com/johnbowles