Slashdot Log In
Vista Service Pack 1 Is Out
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Mar 18, 2008 01:49 PM
from the prepare-to-be-serviced dept.
from the prepare-to-be-serviced dept.
superglaze writes "What's to say? After much prevaricating and slipping out then pulling back, the first service pack for Windows Vista has actually been released. It's available for download now via Microsoft's sites, with an auto-update rollout scheduled for next month, and it should hit Amazon's virtual shelves on Wednesday."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
"Clippy" is back . . . (Score:5, Funny)
Um. Seriously. I'm glad there's a service pack out. But I'm going to wait a few weeks and see if it causes USB drives to melt, or sends your life history to the Ministry of Total Information Awareness.
Re:"Clippy" is back . . . (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:"Clippy" is back . . . (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Huh? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
OR
I feel a great disturbance in the Force. As if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
So how long do I wait? (Score:4, Insightful)
A day? A week? Two?
Keeping in mind my only reason to install is annoyance with current Vista performance; I have no critical reason to update.
Re:So how long do I wait? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:So how long do I wait? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
DNF (Score:5, Funny)
On second thought, from context it seems that you meant Duke-Nuke'em Forever.
Then again, maybe the two meanings of DNF aren't that different.
Parent
Re:So how long do I wait? (Score:5, Funny)
You know, the usual Microsoft software update cycle.
Parent
Re:So how long do I wait? (Score:5, Informative)
If your reason for installing is only for performance, Vista SP1 will probably disappoint you. On the other hand I have installed it on 2 laptops and one desktop and the only problem I had was with an HP Printer driver that stopped working. All I had to do was to go to Control Panel, remove the printer, then add the printer back again and that fixed the problem.
Honestly, I did not find any major improvement performance-wise nor stability-wise as my machines were already running relatively smoothly pre-SP1. There appears to be minor improvements in boot times, shutdown times (though I do this maybe once a week per PC/laptop on average); plus getting in and out of sleep, especially for the laptops, appears to go smoother.
Parent
Re:So how long do I wait? (Score:5, Informative)
No, see, that's what an alpha release is for. Beta releases are supposed to be damned near final, what in these days of release grade inflation is now called a "release candidate". This is why "/.'ers like to discount MS's beta process as a bunch of rubbish"; because for those of us that remember, it is.
"And traditionally it has worked as an alpha process"
There, fixed that for you.
Parent
Poor Vista. (Score:5, Funny)
sounds like an awful lover.
Re:Poor Vista. (Score:5, Insightful)
Awful or no, somebody will most certainly be getting screwed.
Parent
adoption rate (Score:5, Insightful)
List of issues with Vista SP1 (Score:5, Informative)
Service Pack 1... Not impressed so far. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Service Pack 1... Not impressed so far. (Score:5, Informative)
Windows XP Professional 'Direct OEM and Retail License Availability' ends June 30, 2008. And 'System Builder License Availability' ends January 31, 2009.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx [microsoft.com]
So, Microsoft isn't going to offer Windows XP in a few months. As far as an OEM license goes.
Parent
Re:Service Pack 1... Not impressed so far. (Score:5, Funny)
I wouldn't panic if I were you...
Parent
Re:Service Pack 1... Not impressed so far. (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Another Microsoft Success (Score:4, Informative)
I tried the (two) public betas on my Vista Ultimate 64 partition. They all failed to install at 19%. I reported it on the forums, tried to send my logs to an email address they said they'd set up, and even identified which file was supposedly "corrupt" (the one it was installing actually).
For my trouble, I've been ignored, and I'm now going to have to reinstall the ENTIRE OS because some small part of it is supposedly corrupt (systems works fine) and they won't let me just fix that. Lovely. My Ubuntu install is so much better, I wish I didn't need the vista one.
I've been using it for a few weeks (Score:5, Informative)
First off, SP1 is a massive improvement. It installs a lot of bugfixes (including ones not released publicly before)... and it improves other stuff quite a bit. Disk performance is much better- you could argue that copy and paste tasks should not be slowed down by the speed of the OS, but it's improvement.
Overall, my Vista install rarely runs into errors- maybe one or two non-system apps are hanging a week. UAC got less annoying (it wasn't that bad to begin with).
It took an hour to install on my PC, and I didn't run into any issues. I think it helps Vista a lot. Honestly, I prefer Vista on newer machines; it's RAM heavy requiring 2GB+ to run well but RAM is very cheap nowadays and the x64 version works quite well; I had no driver issues personally.
(I still recommend backing up though. I always back up before a major update, whether it's XP, Vista, OS X or Ubuntu).
Re:I've been using it for a few weeks (Score:5, Insightful)
No matter how many times I see this it blows me away. This isn't an anti Microsoft bash - this is a serious efficiency issue - we have gone from a suggested 8Mb for WFWG 3.11 (1992/93 UK) to 2Gb in a generation. That's a massive jump considering that most users are still muddling about with a web browser and a word processor. I know that processor speeds etc have also increased exponentially but I can't help this nagging feeling that it's down to lazy coding.
Parent
Re:I've been using it for a few weeks (Score:5, Interesting)
My new computer has a processor 48x faster (just by a megahertz comparison - I'm sure it's actually even faster in the real world), has 341x the RAM, and has roughly 13,107x the hard drive space.
What does the average public use their machines for these days? Browsing the web and checking email. Why is it that our hardware is now orders of magnitude faster in theory but still does the same basic stuff? I can understand some things taking the extra power. Video compression, 3d gaming, compiling source code, etc, should all take a lot of horsepower, but the most basic computer tasks shouldn't take the resources they do. Glancing at task manager on this machine here at work Firefox is currently using 157MB of RAM. Like I said, I once browsed the web on a machine with 6MB total memory.
Parent
Re:I've been using it for a few weeks (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem isn't bad coding, it's that features are inherently slow. To implement real time spell checking requires a lot of processing power, especially if you can type over 5 characters a second. Think about that for a minute. Remember how long spell checking used to take as it went through the document? It used to take 5-10 minutes for a medium sized paper when I was in HS. Now it can spell check the word that I'm typing multiple times per second and get through the document in around 5 seconds while still bundling in more real time functionality.
I remember when a medium quality video on a computer doing nothing else would have long pauses and not be able to play smoothly. Now I can play music while watching a youtube video through a program running inside my browser with no pauses whatsoever, and that's while streaming it online (which also takes processor power). I can watch youtube videos while playing an intensive game on year old hardware with two monitors running through the video card; that's something I couldn't even dream about a few years ago.
The reason that programs appear slow is because they add features that are more processor intensive than they appear to the naked eye. Plugins are extremely inefficient. Real-time spell checking requires looking up in a dictionary multiple times per second with a lot of wasted effort. Going from 800x600 to 1260x1024 is nearly doubling the number of pixels. CSS is very processor intensive. Features have been pushed on so many fronts it's mind boggling.
Parent
Learn a lesson Microsoft!!! (Score:4, Funny)
Slow install (Score:5, Informative)
At least my mac is up.
Re:Slow install (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Slow install (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Oh noes (Score:4, Interesting)
J/K. I'm always in my mom's basement.
With apologies to Slayer... (Score:5, Funny)
Bugs by Category (Score:5, Insightful)
Shock Horror (Score:5, Informative)
The system feels more responsive, and stuff happens as it should. This is the Vista that should've shipped, but where Vista has suffered Windows Server 2008 has gained; all the initial frustrations have been fixed in SP1 for Vista and Windows Server 2008, so consider Vista RTM a beta kernel for Win2k8. It is after all, the server market Windows isn't 95% prevalent in after all.
Not only is SP1 out, it's also open source (Score:5, Funny)
TOP SECRET Microsoft(c) Project:Longhorn(TM) SP1
Estimated release date:2008
*/
#include "win95.h"
#include "win98.h"
#include "leopard.h"
char chew_up_some_ram[10000000];
void main () {
while (!CRASHED) {
if (first_time_install) {
make_10_gigabyte_swapfile();
do_nothing_loop();
search_and_destroy(FIREFOX | OPENOFFICEORG | ANYTHING_GOOGLE);
hang_system();
}
if (still_not_crashed) {
basically_run_windows_xp();
do_nothing_loop();
}
}
if (!DX10GPU()) {
set_graphics(aero, very_slow);
set_mouse(reaction, sometimes);
}
printf("Welcome to Windows Vista");
while (something) {
sleep(10);
get_user_input();
sleep(10);
act_on_user_input();
sleep(10);
flicker_led_promisingly(hard_disk);
}
creat_general_protection_fault();
}
Re:Possible Tags (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Possible Tags (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Informative)
I snagged SP1, the latest pre release build and it has been fine.
Things seem 'faster', copying files, something that use to take weeks now takes as long as it should.
I still get the random spoolsv crashing for no reason but that was there before SP1.
None of my applications break although I don't use anything custom or home grown or vertical.
The install took a while - three stages with I believe a few stages each. I made a backup of my data prior just in case it went blue. No problems with the install/patch.
captch: robbed
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Funny)
Does Internet Explorer feel 'snappier'?
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Insightful)
To hell with 'seem' - post benchmarks.
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Informative)
Benchmark? I'd imagine it's a fairly long ordeal to really and accurately benchmark file copying, unless you want "It took about 3 seconds to..." Plus, you'd have to have a non-SP1 computer that has exactly the same hard drive fragmentation and everything... it's not like you're benchmarking a game with GameSpot and have x amount of computers to spare for exactly that purpose...
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Informative)
Boot times dropped, both with and without ReadyBoost enabled (using a 4GB 150x SD card) by about 10 seconds, ending up with 1:56 clean and 1:45 with ReadyBoost.
ATTO Disk Benchmark showed a . [zfilms.org]
Copying 1GB of JPG files from one partition to another dropped from 1:31 to 1:09, and to the network from 1:35 to 1:06.
3DMark06 scores very slightly increased, PCBench05 scores slightly decreased.
The graphics test in CoH OF went from 59.7/28.8/7.9 up to 59.7/28.9/9.2
So no huge improvements, but overall things are just a bit more snappy.
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Informative)
SP1 installed very easily for me. Everything the GP says agrees with my own experience, except for the spoolsv crashing. The only issue I had at all was having to change the screen resolution back. As an added bonus, Bioshock now runs without crashing every 5-10 minutes.
Parent
Re:Auto upbreak. (Score:5, Funny)
You mean the 9 out of 10 people that don't actually use Vista but happily parrot every sensationalist headline they run across?
Parent
Re:Unfortunately... (Score:5, Interesting)
Compared to Vista x64 with SP1, Win 2008 ran all my software, was full x64, and the drivers worked for vista. Sound, Video. Codecs worked. Boots quicker, file system ran smoother, files copied at normal speeds.
Even vista after sp1 is still a dog... And god, I hate the new file explorer, I've had to revert back to Directory Opus..
Parent
Re:is vista that bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it is not "that bad."
Could it be better? Yes.
Should it have been tested longer before release? Yes.
Is it as bad as people say on boards like this one? No.
I just bought a brand-new HP dv6768se laptop from Best Buy, upgraded the Vista Home to Vista Ultimate, and am sincerely happy with the system. My HP 8020n has been running flawlessly for many months. Both systems were built for Vista, came with Vista, and have run nothing else.
Oh, Vista has its problems -- the annoying slowness of file copies and deletes being chief among them. But I can sit down and make a bitch-list for my Gentoo and Ubuntu systems as well; my friends with Macs have their own pet peeves with OS X. I love my Linux systems; I love my Vista machines. As with everything in life, nothing is perfect, and whether or not you like something or someone is largely based on your desire to be annoyed.
Parent