RSSVista SP1 to Bring Fixes, Not Features; Due in Early 2008
By Nate Mook | Published August 29, 2007, 11:53 AM
In response to media coverage and pressure from partners, Microsoft finally opened up about Windows Vista Service Pack 1 Wednesday, detailing what customers should expect of the update, and setting a final release date of Q1 2008.
The gist is this: Vista SP1 will not bring major changes to the operating system, but instead deliver improvements related to reliability, security and performance. Customers will not see any major new features, and in turn, Microsoft says they should not wait for SP1 to begin deploying Vista.
Unlike Windows XP SP2, which was a fairly major overhaul, the goal of Vista SP1 is to address feedback from customers and enhance existing features. Microsoft notes that it will improve the performance of the desktop shell, but will not be adding a new search user interface of update to Media Center.
Microsoft already released what it calls a "Beta Preview" of SP1 to a select group of testers earlier this month, and in mid-September will deliver the first SP1 Beta to a group of about 10,000 to 15,000 individuals. The company will not be accepting new applications for the beta program, instead drawing from both its Vista and Windows Server 2008 tester pools.
As development progresses, Microsoft says it will expand the beta program to MSDN and TechNet subscribers, but did not set a firm date. This is expected to take place once Microsoft gets to the "Release Candidate" stages of Vista SP1 later in the year.
So what can customers expect? Early next year, Vista SP1 will appear on Windows Update for consumers and is slated to be around 50MB in size. It will roll-up all previous fixes and updates to Vista, in addition to delivering new improvements. But the situation is more complex for business users.
Because Microsoft will be including all languages in a single SP1 download, the standalone update will be about 1GB for x86 platforms and require 7GB of free disk space to install. In addition, SP1 cannot be applied to offline Windows Vista images. Customers will be able to use System Center Configuration Manager 2007 to deploy the update across their PCs.
Although many files will be changing in Vista SP1, which shares much of its code with Windows Server 2008, Microsoft expects the impact to compatibility to be minimal. The company says Windows users should begin testing their deployments on Vista RTM now, promising a smooth transition when SP1 arrives early next year. Microsoft is attempting to fight the long-held belief that its operating systems tend to have too many bugs until their first service pack.
thought I put one in there, no one has mentioned about the speed of the OS,
Vista is around 20% slower then XP, fact,
and this has been proven by many respectable benchmarking sites, using professional tools that are proven to be worthy,
and as for the 64 bit version, again like XP, the 64 bit version runs almost the same speed as the 32 bit version (I know, bizarre)
but 64 Bit OS's does help applications out, especially Computational Apps, compression, video encoding and of course programs like AutoCad and highly sophisticated music composers. so in that regard 64Bit OS's do there job quite well. not to mention the added benefit knowing that so many spyware and viruses don't support the 64bit OS's.
it's just strange how Windows doesn't gain any advantage what so ever utilizing 64bit.
i feel that although the GUI interface has been designed nicely (for home new users, not pro's who prefers the Classic view in XP more) and improved and tailored nicely, i don't like the idea that this will cost 20% in performance for this extra theme (i say theme, because that is what were talking really)
i feel that 5 years in development, and all we got is a nicer GUI, and not anything else, not worth mentioning really,
i think for the next windows, they may just create windows xp version 2, and i do feel that the day will come when vista will be like a Ferrari, a lovely car, but not for everyday driving in a normal city.
also some of the bad decisions they made were kinda harsh, OpenGL gone, DirectX 10, not for XP, it's like they designed a well oil rig, just to suddenly desert when it suits them,
XP is running great, it's taken all this time, but XP is a well oil machine now, and i don't feel that they have come up with enough innovative designs to justify Vista,
the thing is, in the days of windows 95, every idea was almost a good idea, but now XP has so many great things, it's got to the stage that creating another OS is not as easy as it use to be, one gets to the stage and looks at something, and says "it's perfect..."
and XP has got to that stage where 5 years in existence is not enough, Microsoft has done such a lovely job with XP, vista should of been left in development for another 4 years at least,
because everything in vista, is almost in XP, or more to the point, MS could of put it in XP if they so wished,
i feel the time has come where MS is going to have to scrub the idea of creating a OS every 2-3 years, because there OS's are to damn good these days to be superseded that easily,
Score: 0
|"thought I put one in there, no one has mentioned about the speed of the OS,
Vista is around 20% slower then XP, fact,
and this has been proven by many respectable benchmarking sites, using professional tools that are proven to be worthy"
And when were these benchmarks run? Right after Vista's release, back when the drivers were just one-month old rather than having FOUR YEARS to improve driver stability on the platform?
Check nvidia card benchmarks on vista with the 162.22 drivers and compare those results to the ones run in March.
I'm not saying your benchmarks weren't accurate, just that they used drivers that offered only basic functionality compared to xp because the OS isn't mature like XP is yet.
Score: 0
|I agree with most of what you say. Personally, Vista has been a minor headache due to some business app (billing software) which doesn't run on Vista Home Premium (I'm NOT gonna upgrade to Vista Business for a damn office app - it works fine on "freebie" (preinstalled) XP Home!), the lame method UltraVNC now employs, the fact you can't use Total Recorder due to new sound driver access tech, and other minor issues that overall make me: a. appreciate the beauty and intelligence/security/elegance of Vista.. but, b. make me realize the market needs a year or two more in order to be fully prepared for Vista/its OS replacement.
I want ALL my apps to work FASTER, MORE SECURE (buffer under-overflaws protection, rootkit kernel protection, etc) enjoyed by 64bit Windows. I want to NOT FEEL the speed penalty of Vista vs XP (time on its own will do that - a quad-core 8Ghz machine will run Vista superfast to not care about the speed diff, which will be undetected by human senses/perception).
You've said it PERFECTLY, so to speak. ;) Windows XP is the perfect OS (for today's hardware & software). In two-four years, Vista's benefits combined with 3rd party hardware/software compliance, will make IT the "perfect" OS. And those anal folks who are about to say "there's no such thing as the perfect OS" - well, to me and the abovementioned, THERE IS. Windows XP, plus an experienced techie (to tweak it and beef up its security and enhance its functionality), makes it the Perfect OS for many many people.
In closing, I'll regretfully state that I've downgraded two legal (pre-installed) Vista Home Premium PCs into two pirated XP Pro machines. :) It's sad, but that is the state of affairs, for me, at this moment.
If MS ever gets to read this little note - then my small suggestion to them would be to start giving MORE assistance to their hardware/software partners to provide PERFECTLY WORKING products for 64bit Vista. Most intelligent/knowledgable users wanna go that route today. Open a hotline/forum where users can complain about non-compliant software and some MS taskforce will do its best to help those software manufacturers, EVEN IF THAT MEANS LENDING OUT SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (actual programmers) FOR A FEW WEEKS. Or at least fly down to their offices and give them a braindump/bootcamp on how to get their software 64bit-Vista-friendly. A nice QnA of two development teams will speed things up tremendously, I would imagine. Yeah, I know, I've been told that before numerous times - I think wayyyy outside the box. ;)
Score: 0
|I don't give a crap about Vista SP1 - where's XP SP3 hmmm?
Score: -1
|I'd like to point out to what everyone has been reading about the SP1 for vista, and SP3 for XP is mostly wrong. I can say that because I have seen both of these. I have also seen all the extra fixes for xp (more than 660 extra fixes) and for Vista which AREN'T available for normal download.
I have not yet read one correct article about Vista SP1 or XP SP3, it seams one site takes the information from another site, and so on, until you get back to the original site which based their information on speculation. People don't have to believe me if they don't want to, I know a lot of people will argue with what I have written. The simple fact is, I've got, and witness Vista sp1, Xp sp3, and all the interim fixes, so I can assure you what I have written is correct. The ONLY true part of any articles I have read is no new features have been introduced (features not compatibility etc).
Microsoft want people to update to Vista NOW! so although not lying, they're not going to tell you the full truth relating to these two products. SP1 is a major update to Vista, and I can say that Microsoft have done a good job with it.
On my normal machine (not my test machines) I run Vista x64, the other comp I have Vista 32 SP1 and XP Sp3 installed. I haven't seen sp1 for vista x64, but I do have every interim patch installed, not just the ones available from windowsupdate.
Here is a list of the majority of the available Vista x64 updates (most of which aren't readily downloadable), in my storage directory to show you the file sizes etc. Note the number! I Hope this clears up a few things.
15/08/2007 12:08 2,342,017 Windows6.0-KB905866-v10-x64.msu
13/03/2007 15:08 625,011 Windows6.0-KB917607-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:16 1,744,483 Windows6.0-KB925255_v2_x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:37 461,818 Windows6.0-KB925528-x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:40 2,011,199 Windows6.0-KB925902-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:16 1,773,819 Windows6.0-KB927084_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:15 177,720 Windows6.0-KB927341_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:22 172,017 Windows6.0-KB927546_x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:37 5,184,632 Windows6.0-KB928089-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:30 516,117 Windows6.0-KB928135_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:16 233,515 Windows6.0-KB928188_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:22 686,864 Windows6.0-KB928208_v3_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:30 259,299 Windows6.0-KB928253_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:22 184,528 Windows6.0-KB928570_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:15 412,425 Windows6.0-KB928631_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:15 1,497,619 Windows6.0-KB929011_x64.msu
13/06/2007 03:21 4,482,798 Windows6.0-KB929123-x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:37 6,170,625 Windows6.0-KB929427-x64.msu
13/03/2007 15:08 289,479 Windows6.0-KB929451-x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:55 1,011,676 Windows6.0-KB929547-v2-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:30 515,826 Windows6.0-KB929550_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:30 364,866 Windows6.0-KB929577_x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:36 690,783 Windows6.0-KB929615-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:16 2,038,325 Windows6.0-KB929637_v2_x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:35 161,459 Windows6.0-KB929685-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:30 456,348 Windows6.0-KB929734_v3_x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:34 386,924 Windows6.0-KB929735-x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:35 256,873 Windows6.0-KB929761-x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:37 178,013 Windows6.0-KB929762-x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:37 280,547 Windows6.0-KB929763-x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:35 233,058 Windows6.0-KB929777-v2-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:15 258,152 Windows6.0-KB929790_v3_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:12 1,014,855 Windows6.0-KB929824-v2-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:29 254,139 Windows6.0-KB929909_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:15 3,753,954 Windows6.0-KB929913_x64.msu
11/07/2007 03:33 3,620,771 Windows6.0-KB929916-x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:37 223,992 Windows6.0-KB930163-x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:43 370,398 Windows6.0-KB930178-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 536,862 Windows6.0-KB930193_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:55 214,418 Windows6.0-KB930194-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:29 214,418 Windows6.0-KB930194_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 490,619 Windows6.0-KB930311_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:29 215,024 Windows6.0-KB930495_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:20 1,009,206 Windows6.0-KB930517_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:29 454,910 Windows6.0-KB930568_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 447,644 Windows6.0-KB930570_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:39 2,013,448 Windows6.0-KB930585-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:29 6,971,733 Windows6.0-KB930618_v2_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:13 452,353 Windows6.0-KB930627-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:18 241,977 Windows6.0-KB930819_x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:35 236,168 Windows6.0-KB930857-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 297,013 Windows6.0-KB930883_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 284,920 Windows6.0-KB930917_x64.msu
04/02/2007 18:05 231,028 Windows6.0-KB930955-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:29 2,040,364 Windows6.0-KB930979_v2_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:38 3,414,861 Windows6.0-KB931099-x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:38 150,288 Windows6.0-KB931174-x64.msu
13/06/2007 03:21 276,749 Windows6.0-KB931213-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:28 253,372 Windows6.0-KB931263_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:20 253,114 Windows6.0-KB931369_x64.msu
30/01/2007 15:37 1,015,818 Windows6.0-KB931573-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:28 537,883 Windows6.0-KB931619_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:37 455,084 Windows6.0-KB931621-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:27 179,983 Windows6.0-KB931654_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:38 418,245 Windows6.0-KB931671-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 528,867 Windows6.0-KB931674_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 447,336 Windows6.0-KB931675_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:37 10,133,827 Windows6.0-KB931768-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:27 180,798 Windows6.0-KB931770_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:58 212,641 Windows6.0-KB931812_v2_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:10 552,371 Windows6.0-KB931836-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:27 372,773 Windows6.0-KB931936_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:58 1,018,221 Windows6.0-KB931969_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:01 839,574 Windows6.0-KB932030_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:26 254,275 Windows6.0-KB932079_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:00 166,172 Windows6.0-KB932094_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:00 425,253 Windows6.0-KB932173_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:00 742,429 Windows6.0-KB932206_x64.msu
23/03/2007 12:12 6,706,355 Windows6.0-KB932246-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:00 173,404 Windows6.0-KB932385_x64.msu
14/04/2007 13:31 1,109,297 Windows6.0-KB932394-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:00 6,192,699 Windows6.0-KB932404_v2_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:10 1,834,548 Windows6.0-KB932406-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:26 146,939 Windows6.0-KB932471_v2_x64.msu
13/03/2007 15:08 686,233 Windows6.0-KB932590-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:59 1,469,221 Windows6.0-KB932593_v2_x64.msu
15/08/2007 12:08 3,547,610 Windows6.0-KB932596-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:26 256,523 Windows6.0-KB932626_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:37 2,467,787 Windows6.0-KB932649-v3-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:59 180,909 Windows6.0-KB932652_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:59 1,412,646 Windows6.0-KB932653_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:59 179,080 Windows6.0-KB932753_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:59 265,941 Windows6.0-KB932757_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:59 1,422,697 Windows6.0-KB932814_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:39 4,492,912 Windows6.0-KB932818-x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:36 817,458 Windows6.0-KB932988-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:59 2,093,422 Windows6.0-KB932998_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:58 181,809 Windows6.0-KB933049_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:58 420,597 Windows6.0-KB933228_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:58 667,889 Windows6.0-KB933242_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:58 294,960 Windows6.0-KB933245_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:57 1,205,852 Windows6.0-KB933251_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:26 196,546 Windows6.0-KB933262_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:57 1,413,855 Windows6.0-KB933288_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:26 460,053 Windows6.0-KB933340_v2_x64.msu
02/08/2007 11:17 537,333 Windows6.0-KB933360-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:26 413,211 Windows6.0-KB933433_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:57 262,589 Windows6.0-KB933454_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:57 259,160 Windows6.0-KB933468_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:57 317,603 Windows6.0-KB933495_x64.msu
13/06/2007 03:22 12,576,182 Windows6.0-KB933566-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:57 257,201 Windows6.0-KB933578_x64.msu
15/08/2007 06:36 1,258,417 Windows6.0-KB933579-x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:39 2,675,347 Windows6.0-KB933590-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:56 251,792 Windows6.0-KB933595_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:56 457,729 Windows6.0-KB933607_x64.msu
23/05/2007 09:11 907,232 Windows6.0-KB933612-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:56 175,147 Windows6.0-KB933620_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:56 438,369 Windows6.0-KB933649_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:26 493,693 Windows6.0-KB933657_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:25 1,117,073 Windows6.0-KB933664_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:57 2,682,449 Windows6.0-KB933750_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:56 200,066 Windows6.0-KB933771_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:25 404,053 Windows6.0-KB933778_x64.msu
28/03/2007 16:06 178,288 Windows6.0-KB933824-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:56 208,642 Windows6.0-KB933847_v3_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:55 272,383 Windows6.0-KB933860_x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:38 464,445 Windows6.0-KB933872-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:55 792,063 Windows6.0-KB933876_x64.msu
11/07/2007 02:08 3,433,381 Windows6.0-KB933928-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:25 858,412 Windows6.0-KB933942_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:56 1,508,073 Windows6.0-KB934008_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:55 387,519 Windows6.0-KB934056_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:55 659,114 Windows6.0-KB934111_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:25 784,054 Windows6.0-KB934202_x64.msu
18/08/2007 06:44 803,532 Windows6.0-KB934274_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:55 213,631 Windows6.0-KB934314_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:55 399,469 Windows6.0-KB934327_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:55 238,492 Windows6.0-KB934374_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:54 299,882 Windows6.0-KB934455_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:54 179,121 Windows6.0-KB934611_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:25 456,913 Windows6.0-KB934633_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:25 1,281,029 Windows6.0-KB934637_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 178,087 Windows6.0-KB934641_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 456,735 Windows6.0-KB934796_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:54 329,100 Windows6.0-KB934797_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 2,345,980 Windows6.0-KB934888_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:54 400,723 Windows6.0-KB934907_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:18 743,047 Windows6.0-KB935200_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:20 1,274,783 Windows6.0-KB935222_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:54 233,091 Windows6.0-KB935276_x64.msu
11/07/2007 02:01 6,786,306 Windows6.0-KB935280-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:54 270,870 Windows6.0-KB935333_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:53 179,313 Windows6.0-KB935366_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:53 561,906 Windows6.0-KB935415_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:19 277,284 Windows6.0-KB935427_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:53 1,035,489 Windows6.0-KB935458_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:54 1,990,789 Windows6.0-KB935495_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:53 260,197 Windows6.0-KB935553_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:53 664,892 Windows6.0-KB935576_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 180,464 Windows6.0-KB935606_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 740,893 Windows6.0-KB935607_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:11 11,275,487 Windows6.0-KB935652-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 1,146,003 Windows6.0-KB935663_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:19 202,436 Windows6.0-KB935685_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 197,315 Windows6.0-KB935755_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 489,412 Windows6.0-KB935765_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 411,632 Windows6.0-KB935782_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 456,858 Windows6.0-KB935783_x64.msu
15/08/2007 12:08 985,543 Windows6.0-KB935807-v2-x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:11 1,805,348 Windows6.0-KB935855-v2-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 187,103 Windows6.0-KB935876_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 1,117,738 Windows6.0-KB935881_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:52 1,632,980 Windows6.0-KB935901_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:19 1,411,109 Windows6.0-KB935936_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:19 415,130 Windows6.0-KB935945_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:18 594,233 Windows6.0-KB935963_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:51 591,646 Windows6.0-KB935977_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 176,909 Windows6.0-KB935988_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:19 522,777 Windows6.0-KB936003_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:54 863,113 Windows6.0-KB936004-x64.msu
15/08/2007 06:26 1,255,584 Windows6.0-KB936021-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:51 678,658 Windows6.0-KB936029_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 6,192,260 Windows6.0-KB936054_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:18 1,523,802 Windows6.0-KB936060_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:51 316,025 Windows6.0-KB936136_x64.msu
29/07/2007 23:12 208,008 Windows6.0-KB936150-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:24 795,494 Windows6.0-KB936162_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:51 551,436 Windows6.0-KB936176_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:51 420,875 Windows6.0-KB936183_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 394,355 Windows6.0-KB936205_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 1,144,983 Windows6.0-KB936225_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 1,777,745 Windows6.0-KB936229_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:23 681,906 Windows6.0-KB936344_x64.msu
13/06/2007 03:23 240,666 Windows6.0-KB936357-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 1,055,955 Windows6.0-KB936460_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:16 480,146 Windows6.0-KB936515_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 1,012,554 Windows6.0-KB936559_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 776,692 Windows6.0-KB936608_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:16 2,212,213 Windows6.0-KB936613_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:54 1,266,125 Windows6.0-KB936710-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 1,315,434 Windows6.0-KB936711_x64.msu
18/08/2007 06:43 1,415,936 Windows6.0-KB936775_x64.msu
15/08/2007 06:37 12,803,651 Windows6.0-KB936782-x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:38 180,885 Windows6.0-KB936824-x64.msu
09/05/2007 10:36 209,654 Windows6.0-KB936825-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 1,480,200 Windows6.0-KB936970_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:49 2,619,130 Windows6.0-KB937018_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:49 1,116,672 Windows6.0-KB937063_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:12 164,371 Windows6.0-KB937077-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:49 426,490 Windows6.0-KB937082_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:34 1,557,937 Windows6.0-KB937085_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:12 505,430 Windows6.0-KB937123-v2-x64.msu
15/08/2007 06:22 13,139,747 Windows6.0-KB937143-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:22 1,012,105 Windows6.0-KB937168_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:49 1,305,632 Windows6.0-KB937187_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:49 386,437 Windows6.0-KB937188_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:50 2,295,068 Windows6.0-KB937229_x64.msu
16/08/2007 21:58 1,868,170 Windows6.0-KB937230_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:49 2,225,439 Windows6.0-KB937248_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:48 201,264 Windows6.0-KB937322_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:43 654,105 Windows6.0-KB937328_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:18 107,986 Windows6.0-KB937333_x64.cab
13/08/2007 05:43 2,062,425 Windows6.0-KB937381_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:43 187,744 Windows6.0-KB937385_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:43 307,048 Windows6.0-KB937426_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:42 480,845 Windows6.0-KB937454_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:42 510,785 Windows6.0-KB937500_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:42 809,536 Windows6.0-KB937630_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:42 227,665 Windows6.0-KB937651_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:42 287,876 Windows6.0-KB937658_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:42 607,970 Windows6.0-KB937713_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:02 882,587 Windows6.0-KB938055_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:21 6,217,392 Windows6.0-KB938062_x64.msu
18/08/2007 06:25 1,505,569 Windows6.0-KB938080_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:41 263,363 Windows6.0-KB938101_x64.msu
15/08/2007 06:36 957,330 Windows6.0-KB938123-x64.msu
15/08/2007 06:21 800,341 Windows6.0-KB938127-x64.msu
09/08/2007 10:33 3,825,137 Windows6.0-KB938194-x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:41 280,810 Windows6.0-KB938239_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:41 314,196 Windows6.0-KB938248_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:41 301,859 Windows6.0-KB938475_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:35 229,535 Windows6.0-KB938636_x64.msu
28/06/2007 05:13 1,008,478 Windows6.0-KB938637-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:02 2,048,819 Windows6.0-KB938660_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:35 967,896 Windows6.0-KB938723_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:35 792,692 Windows6.0-KB938724_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:35 205,333 Windows6.0-KB938725_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:02 749,755 Windows6.0-KB938885_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:14 320,283 Windows6.0-KB938927_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:13 527,406 Windows6.0-KB938928_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:54 487,801 Windows6.0-KB938952-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:03 247,016 Windows6.0-KB938956_x64.msu
09/08/2007 10:33 14,833,471 Windows6.0-KB938979-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:03 440,811 Windows6.0-KB939004_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:02 451,118 Windows6.0-KB939008_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:54 567,982 Windows6.0-KB939159-x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:54 162,520 Windows6.0-KB939165-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:02 197,135 Windows6.0-KB939331_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:02 1,221,714 Windows6.0-KB939677_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:14 1,052,480 Windows6.0-KB939718_v2_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:19 2,104,988 Windows6.0-KB939720_x64.msu
13/08/2007 05:34 2,115,253 Windows6.0-KB939727_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:14 229,049 Windows6.0-KB939772_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:14 400,578 Windows6.0-KB939882_x64.msu
15/08/2007 22:57 480,509 Windows6.0-KB940059_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:02 1,464,839 Windows6.0-KB940069_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:53 542,305 Windows6.0-KB940105-x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:15 1,436,669 Windows6.0-KB940145_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:14 191,695 Windows6.0-KB940480_x64.msu
13/08/2007 06:15 9,298,110 Windows6.0-KB940508_v2_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:53 1,032,295 Windows6.0-KB940646-x64.msu
19/08/2007 20:16 1,045,259 Windows6.0-KB940894_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:53 2,327,255 Windows6.0-KB941090-v2-x64.msu
23/08/2007 05:48 1,957,563 Windows6.0_KB932063_x64.msu
29/08/2007 13:34 8,610,951 Windows6.0_KB936469_x64.msu
30/08/2007 15:28 2,069,031 Windows6.0_KB936756_x64.msu
30/08/2007 15:27 374,402 Windows6.0_KB938091_x64.msu
30/08/2007 15:27 373,950 Windows6.0_KB938092_x64.msu
30/08/2007 15:27 8,614,922 Windows6.0_KB938098_x64.msu
24/08/2007 12:48 8,611,947 Windows6.0_KB939021_x64.msu
22/08/2007 06:32 1,363,846 Windows6.0_KB939750_x64.msu
29/08/2007 13:32 481,480 Windows6.0_KB940856_x64.msu
30/08/2007 01:58 376,013 Windows6.0_KB941021_v2_x64.msu
29/08/2007 01:51 351,397 Windows6.0_KB941102_x64.msu
29/08/2007 13:34 230,871 Windows6.0_KB941137_x64.msu
24/08/2007 12:48 1,655,671 Windows6.0_KB941234_x64.msu
30/08/2007 01:57 475,885 Windows6.0_KB941298_x64.msu
29/08/2007 13:34 282,749 Windows6.0_KB941311_x64.msu
25/08/2007 07:00 2,066,752 Windows6.0_KB941492_x64.msu
30/08/2007 01:58 278,173 Windows6.0_KB941561_x64.msu
29/08/2007 13:36 8,613,351 Windows6.0_KB941673_x64.msu
292 File(s) 394,049,741 bytes
Score: -1
|Your recent edit failed to remove the unnecessary and boring bullcrap.
Score: 0
|The size of SP1 is a lot bigger than 50mb! the current download for the beta is 685mb for the 32 bit version! Vista is a bit different to XP, instead of having different language versions of system and programme files they're language neutral. Its true that there are language components related to the different parts, but it should be known that most of that download size relates to actual updates, and not the language components :)
Score: 0
|For most users, they will only need to download 50MB worth of bits from Windows Update. The full standalone installer will be 1GB, but that is not required for most users.
Score: 0
|That was a CD image. The final version will be a standalone exe.
Score: 0
|Nope! thats IS the standalone exe. The name of it is: windows6.0-kb936330-x86.exe
I don't know where they got 50mb from, but its wrong!
Score: 0
|From the article: "SP1 cannot be applied to offline Windows Vista images"
So this means it will never be possible to install 64-bit Vista on systems with 4GB or more of memory without temporarily removing memory modules from a computer?
Microsoft is doing a horrible job when it comes to releasing updates for the OS if the updates can't be integrated with a Vista install DVD.
Score: 0
|Someone will figure out a way.
Score: 0
|No, that quote was badly worded.
Please see the official white paper released today by Microsoft. Under the section titled "Deploying Windows Vista Service Pack 1" it states "Windows Vista SP1 will support the following delivery methods: ... Slipstream. The slipstream version of Windows Vista SP1 is media that already contains the service pack, which companies can use to deploy the operating system to new computers or to upgrade existing computers."
Score: 0
|As usual, Microsoft is just being pain in the *** for no apparent reason. Convenience isnt part of their vocabulary.
Oh god, even thinking about Vista makes me feel sick.
Score: 0
|I've played with Vista for months and couldn't see any reason to make the upgrade from XP.
UAC drove me up the wall, I would love to hire bodyguards for Bill Gates, I would tell them to act just like UAC, see how long Bill lasts before he fires them :)
But there's not enough room or time here for me to go on my Vista nothing new or innovative bloatware add that with bloated apps etc.. rant :)
What I'm really interested in is the reaction from those who usually hold off for all the fixes usually associated with sp1 releases, how will they react to this sp1 release.
Score: 0
|The purpose of UAC is to stop those people who run everything they download from the internet. I know it's a bad idea, they should just do what Apple does. Just blame it on someone instead of taking responsibility.
Score: 0
|And those same people, are the very same, tha just click OK on dialogs, without reading them.
So the net result of UAC is a big fat nothing. It annoys the responsible, who did not need protection anyway, and it does not help the silly Ok clickers either.
Score: 0
|Should have given it more time. Honestly, after a month or so of having a running system, all the tasks that you do which require UAC warnings are pretty much done with.
Now, when I see a UAC window I'm happy to have the little "think twice here" warning, especially when something triggers it that I wasn't expecting.
(The only stupid one is that it pops up UAC when changing items from the "All Users" area of the start menu. THAT is annoying)
Score: 0
|JeremyGNJ, you have an UAC prompt because "all users" is NOT "only your" user. So this prompt is right.
Score: 0
|I'm sure he knows that. He's probably more annoyed at the software developers who still use the "All users" directories.
Score: 0
|Absolutely 100% correct. UAC is GAR, bage that is.
Score: 0
|I gave Vista plenty of time and I really don't see any reason on why I should upgrade to it from XP.
UAC is a pain but it can be shut off, so if that's the only reason I had I would be using Vista now.
Vista has new features (well not really new but to Microsoft it's new :) ) but when you boil it all down Vista is just XP with new lipstick colors.
Score: 0
|That functionality was already available in XP - and surprise, surprise! it didn't work there either. UAC just took it a step further, and started bugging you for everything you do in system configuration (or just file management).
It's useless for what it's designed to do. No one who needs it understands or cares what it's there for - they just click 'ok' again. :P
Score: 0
|Seems that the purpose was to try to get developers to stop trying to run everything as Administrator. UAC doesn't really work against malware and wasn't designed to do so.
Score: 0
|UAC is a concept taken from UNIX/Linux, whereby system changes need to be made through the root account. Therefore UAC is not a new feature to annoy people but a successful and more secure feature long employed in other OS's (Microsoft again playing catch up many years too late).
Score: 0
|The only problem is that there's no way of temporarily turning it off ... you have to have it on the entire time you install the new windows. I tested it out from a version another person had on my computer (have an external so I could restore the former XP). I started putting the things back on the computer that I used in XP. They all worked, from what I could see, but I do NOT appreciate having to click "YES, INSTALL!" 1000 times. I have probably 50 different programs (chat, pic editors, Office, etc) and about 10 more CD's with updates for things, drivers, etc.
After about two hours of trying to install half of the programs, I said forget it. I couldn't take it. Not only would they ask if you wanted to install it, but if it was an Internet program, you'd have one and sometimes two MORE "yes"'s to click.
The things that don't make sense is that they don't allow a temporary turn off, but also they made it so showy (blacking the screen out, etc) that it takes the programs just that much LONGER to install.
I, personally, was very dissatisfied just with that, and then I noticed how it absolutely sucked the life out of the machine -- even WITH 2GB of RAM, 256M RAM video card, and a pretty darned fast Ghz w/ HT processor. I just couldn't take it.
In short, yes it IS the same others use, but made in the most annoying damned way it's ridiculous.
Score: 0
|Why can't you turn it off temporarily? I turned it off completely (when I was briefly playing with Vista for a few weeks).. Are you saying that I COULD HAVE NOT turn it back on now without experiencing problems?
Score: 0
|And he thus should contact them every time the popup warning comes up, to have them fix it... "Just shooting another email to you guys cuz AGAIN your mal-formed non-Vista-friendly software annoyed me via UAC". After 50 or so such emails from the guy, they'll either say "you're right", sue him for harassment (possibly sexual if they are homophobic hehehe), or create a nice mail filter rule to wipe their virtual arses with his complaints. In either way, WORTH THE TRY to bug them about it for a little while.
Score: 0
|Does anyone see any reason to believe that XP still isn't the way to go? Anyone? Buehler?
Score: 0
|There's nothing bad about Vista per se (once you completely disable UAC), but if you've got XP SP2, there's no real compelling reason to upgrade. I've been using Vista since it came out, and I'm not able to come up with anything that I think makes it better than XP.
Score: 0
|Bueller....
Bueller....
Score: 0
|Another nail in the coffin to any chance of 64bit going mainstream before 2010.
What a headache... in addition to this: http://www.betanews.com/...y_Management/1188398636
MS is becoming too big, unwieldy, out of touch, unresponsive to the consumer... exactly what caused IBM's fall from uber dominance-- Ballmer and Gates need to step back and hand over the reins to someone else.
Ubuntu is looking better and better / improving by leaps and bounds....
Score: 0
|Agreed... it's why Vista should've only come out in 64bit-- additionally, that would've freed up time & resources to include major innovations that eventually got scrapped.
Score: 0
|Yeap. They should make Vista 64 bits only.
Score: 0
|Microsoft should also make it completely impossible to use unsigned drivers as well. They should never have enabled workarounds that let people install unsigned drivers in the first place.
It would also be nice if Microsoft required hardware manufacturers to develop 64-bit Vista drivers to get their hardware WHQL certified (like Microsoft said they were going to do). Canon, for example, states that their LiDE 20 scanner is WHQL certified but there are no 64-bit drivers available.
Score: 0
|I think Gates needs step back in charge and fired all these MBAs.
Score: 0
|Vista Ultimate's Texas Hold 'em is a masterpiece (I've yet to find a poker game as user friendly).
But other than that, you're quite correct.
Score: 0
|I'd never have purchased Vista if that had been the case. Look at all the complaints with finding working Vista 32 bit drivers...well, what about 64-bit drivers? D-Link, anyone?
Score: 0
|"Microsoft should also make it completely impossible to use unsigned drivers as well."
No.
NVIDIA laptop drivers for the FX series don't get updated ever; it's down to the manufacturer of the laptop to compile them.
So naturally I have to modify one of the .ini files to make it think it supports my graphics card (the desktop version of my card *is* supported and is almost identical).
This then makes the driver unsigned.
If this were to be not allowed I would have to live with 3-year-old graphics drivers.
Score: 0
|And I'm sure Microsoft was going to pay for all the small developers who couldn't afford to go through the driver signing process, right?
Yeah, nice try. Way to cripple your market by locking out small hardware manufacturers (and in turn, many niche users using their hardware).
Score: 0
|Personally there are many things that make Vista more usable than XP for me. And to be honest it's really all the features Microsoft has been strongly promoting (Instant Search, Icon Previews, More secure). Obviously it's 100% possible to tag on these features to Windows XP, but then again you don't get the same polish and Vista-smoothness that goes along with it.
Yeah none of the features are innovative but they don't need to be, they just need to make things easier for the end user. Personally XP is rough around the edges and going back to do work on it is a little more strenuous on the eyes than it used to be.
Microsoft got a lot of things right with Windows Vista. It's never crashed since I've installed it (5 or 6 months now) and i've yet to see a major virus outbreak with it. Put a coat of paint on it, slap it in the a** and I think we have a product worth using. Kudos to MS for not sucking.
Score: 0
|Yeah, that's because folks had to develop drivers compatible with 5 different flavors Vista in both 32 & 64...
And the faster 'widespread' migration to 64 would've added even more pressure:
64 bit drivers would magically now be plentiful & likely work ok for the most part, if millions of pc's were now running 64 bit.
Score: 0
|What draconian thinking-- maybe in North Korea would something like that fly. I pay full price for both OS & computer-- i reserve the right to put in whatever drivers i want.
Score: 0
|$16?
Score: 0
|Yeah, that's because folks had to develop drivers compatible with 5 different flavors Vista in both 32 & 64...
2 drivers. 64 and 32 bit. The driver model is the same across "editions (basic to business, home premium to ultimate)
Score: 0
|...and then whine about how horrible the OS is because your drivers don't play well with others...
Score: 0
|As PC_Tool said...just two flavors. Still--I suppose you're right about 64-bit drivers. Heh, I still couldn't imagine how many more people would be shouting in the forums about how evil Microsoft is and now "not only forcing them to upgrade their software, but now they have to replace their brand-new non-64 bit PCs too!"
Just imagine the anti-Vista chatter...
Score: 0
|Beta drivers would go bye-bye--or at least 90% of them. How could they test new alpha versions of driver revisions? What...another Windows version? Windows Vista, Le'mmeInstallDaDriversIWanna 32-bit and 64-bit editions?
Score: 0
|lmao, I did the same thing with my GeForce2 Go card in my old laptop. I actually changed it back to a real driver...just made it install the GeForce MX100 driver. Works fine, and lets me play Kotor and Kotor 2...very slowly...
(Geforce 2 Go is technically the same exact gpu as the MX100, hence the "wrong" driver install).
Score: 0
|