Slashdot Log In
Windows Vista Service Pack 2 Released
Posted by
Soulskill
on Wed May 27, 2009 07:58 AM
from the how-much-beta-does-one-really-need dept.
from the how-much-beta-does-one-really-need dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has finally released the final build of Service Pack 2 for Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008. 'There are a few significant additions that are included in SP2: Windows Search 4.0, Bluetooth 2.1 Feature Pack, the ability to record data on to Blu-Ray media natively in Vista, Windows Connect Now (WCN) is now in the Wi-Fi Configuration, and exFAT file system supports UTC timestamps. The service pack contains about 800 hotfixes.' A list of other notable changes is available on TechNet. SP2 isn't included in Automatic Update yet, but it will be 'during the coming months.'"
Related Stories
Submission: Windows Vista Service Pack 2 released by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.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.
Like Digging Through People's Trash (Score:4, Insightful)
I can almost imagine the developer sitting at his desk getting an e-mail from their issue management system that there's a problem with Fc.exe (file compare) ... only to have him realize that his for loop that iterates over the buffer that reads the files should have the while conditions of <= 128 and not simply < 128!
This is forgivable, I code some pretty stupid errors sometimes.
What isn't forgivable is that one of the columns on this bug spreadsheet is "Publicly Available" which implies to me that there is a list I'm not seeing of fixed bugs which would be annoying and probably even non-fixed bugs they purposefully suppress from public knowledge which is alarming!
Re:Like Digging Through People's Trash (Score:5, Insightful)
"What isn't forgivable is that one of the columns on this bug spreadsheet is "Publicly Available" which implies to me that there is a list I'm not seeing of fixed bugs which would be annoying and probably even non-fixed bugs they purposefully suppress from public knowledge which is alarming!"
Hello. Closed source software. I damn well *expect* there to be thousands, if not more, bugs that are not and will never be fixed in Windows until someone "finds" them and posts about them publically, security related or not. I doubt even the militarised versions of Windows have *everything* they know about fixed - it's easier to just say "don't do this" or not include a certain tool/utility/feature than it is to fix it and document it.
Why on Earth would you ever find this alarming, or unforgivable? It's the whole point of closed-source software, so that you *never* know what's going on with the code and (hopefully) never see it.
Parent
Re:Like Digging Through People's Trash (Score:5, Insightful)
Operating system experience updates
* SP2 improves Windows Media Center (WMC) in the area of content protection for TV.
Parent
Re:Like Digging Through People's Trash (Score:5, Informative)
Look before you FUD. I know WMC-fu, have contributed to DVRMSToolbox, and follow WMC stuff pretty closely.
The content protection thing actually IS an improvement. It's not more DRM, it's less, or rather, it fixes what's there. While it doesn't remove DRM completely, it does fix where WMC would copy protect when CGMS-A flags (Macrovision analog output protection, like for cable PPV) are accidentally encoded into DTV signals. That buggy behavior, on the part of Microsoft and the broadcasters, was why American Gladiators got flagged as protected months ago. There was a big stink about it, although I can't really understand why anyone would care about "pituitary retards banging their F#@$ing skulls together and congratulating YOU on living in the land of freedom!"
I believe legacy code for the broadcast flag was also removed, so ATSC/ClearQAM can't possibly be set as protected now.
Unrelated, but a DRM relaxation is coming for CableCARD, in that non-premium digital cable will no longer be protected. HOWEVER:
- This is a Windows 7 thing, and requires a firmware update to the tuner, an installed copy of Duke Nukem Forever, and who knows what else?
- It's totally up to the cableco to decide what is and isn't "premium", so chances are stuff like Discovery HD/SciFi HD/ESPN HD will stay locked down. Only the stuff that is already on ClearQAM will be opened up.
Not that CableCARD was ever worthwhile. For what you can and can't do with it, you might as well rent a DVR from the cableco if you really need that much TV.
Parent
Re:Like Digging Through People's Trash (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the whole point of closed-source software, so that you *never* know what's going on with the code and (hopefully) never see it.
The industry rule of thumb for a software developer is about 10 lines of code per hour, on average, over the lifetime of the project. According to Microsoft, Windows XP has about 40 million SLOC.
Without business staff, PMs and SDETs, that's 4 million man-hours. That's 1923 full time man-years. Assuming Microsoft pays their SDEs $80,000 on average, those 40 million lines of code cost them $153,840,000.
Why can't the point of closed-source be to put food on the table? If all software is free, what are software developers going to do for a living? Buy an air nailer and become a roofer?
Parent
Hello. Open source software, too. (Score:4, Insightful)
"I damn well *expect* there to be thousands, if not more, bugs that are not and will never be fixed in Windows until someone "finds" them and posts about them publically, security related or not"
Hell, I expect there to be thousands, if not more, bugs that are not and will never be fixed in open source software, until somebody -other than those actually responsible for the code- submit a patch.
I'm looking at you, silly little Thunderbird bug #92165 from 2001/Jul/24.
Parent
Re:Like Digging Through People's Trash (Score:5, Funny)
Much to my amusement, a colleague of mine once suggested that the conversion from polytheism to monotheism was the result of an off-by-one error :)
Parent
Re:Like Digging Through People's Trash (Score:5, Insightful)
So Atheism is the result of a divide by zero error? The result as done by hand makes sense: DNE, "Does Not Exist"
No, athiests are just like monotheists; they just believe in one less god.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Just FYI, it's not 'shove all the rows at them', it's 'use ajax to request the rows you need and don't waste time re-rendering the other 95% of the page - and no cacheing doesn't always work'... well at least when I do it that's how it works.
The best service pack for Vista (Score:4, Funny)
is Windows 7 RC1.
So close to SP3? (Score:5, Funny)
Isn't that coming out in October?
Finally, I can torrent from windows (Score:5, Informative)
I can't believe MS finally (almost) admitted they made a mistake. It may have taken almost as long, in technological terms, as it took the Catholic Church to admit it's mistakes with Galileo, but at least it's a step in the right direction.
Re:Finally, I can torrent from windows (Score:4, Funny)
as it took the Catholic Church to admit it's mistakes with Galileo
Obviously someone watched Angels and Demons last night...
Parent
Re:Finally, I can torrent from windows (Score:5, Interesting)
The reason why it was implemented according to various sources was to limit the damage of all those infected Windows machines spamming networks looking for new vulnerable hosts to infect, and also, slow down the rate at which they would cause bedlam. By enforcing such a limit, the aim was to impede an infected machines ability to propogate the infection; of course, we're primarily talking the nasty to catastrophic Windows worms we've seen in the past from gaping truck-sized security holes in critical system components.
However, if you look at Vista, you'll note that contrary to what some people would like you to believe, the exploitability of the OS has gone down drastically versus XP, in particular, with regards to worms. This is of course due to several reasons: better OS security architecture, defence-in-depth (DEP/ASLR/etc...), properly enforced user permissions, the list goes on. Take the most recent Conficker worm as an example. Vista infections will almost certainly be a lot lower, for one, the exploit path that uses the MS08-067 [microsoft.com] vulnerability that forms its primary exploit vector can not be exploited anonymously on Vista and newer machines. The vulnerable code is still present unless patched, but it requires valid user credentials.
At a guess, I'd say Microsoft came to the conclusion that the TCP limit was no longer necessary on Vista, as the improved security of the OS made the need for such connection limitations redundant. On the other hand, I'll be surprised if they ever remove it on XP, because no matter how much you patch it, it is fundamentally more insecure by its architecture than Vista. And if they don't remove the limitation on XP, I'd argue that's quite telling as to the motivation and reasoning behind removing it on Vista only.
Parent
Re:Finally, I can torrent from windows (Score:4, Interesting)
After running a fire-breathing Celeron 2.5GHz as router/fileserver/torrentbox/freepbx for a few months, I finally bit the bullet and picked up a soekris net5501 [soekris.com] and installed pfsense and freeswitch on it. My firewalling and phones run right at well under 20 watts.
Of course that leaves me without fileserver or torrentbox, but an inexpensive alix [pcengines.ch] or fit pc [fit-pc.com] running freenas will fill that role nicely.
Parent
Windows Search 4.0?! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Windows Search 4.0?! (Score:5, Informative)
The thing is, you don't actually notice any real difference in how the indexing works with WS4, it's all back-end. It's suppose to be more efficient that the search/indexing code that came with Vista. I know it can be annoying when installed in XP, but since its predecessor was already integrated into Vista it should be an improvement.
If you still hate it, disable the Indexing service.
Parent
Re:Windows Search 4.0?! (Score:4, Informative)
The thing is, you don't actually notice any real difference in how the indexing works with WS4, it's all back-end.
I can't speak to what it's like on Vista, but on XP two things are true:
Parent
Indexing Service (Score:3, Informative)
You have to do heavy configuration in Vista with Windows Search to have it search outside your profile, but once yo
Re:Windows Search 4.0?! (Score:5, Informative)
I have Vista SP1 installed for playing games the hard drive was thrashing so much it was actually causing stutter in my fps games sometimes until I turned the indexer and the superfetch services off (I actually had to turn off superfetch twice as it ignored me the first time). I don't seem to remember ever having to deal with that sort of issue on XP, so my guess is vista is probably worse for this sort of thing. It would be nice if SP2 alleviated this, but I'm not holding my breath. Incidentally, I find it sort of funny and sort of annoying that there are so many Vista defenders out there, when my own experience is that, yeah it runs well enough, but only after turn off all the crap like this and the graphical effects, and even then it's a little slow for a brand new OS on a brand new computer. On the other hand, with any fresh linux install I also go around removing a lot of the default desktop packages that I don't want, only it seems a lot easier and more transparent in linux, but maybe I'm just used to the linux way and not the windows way.
The funny thing is that Vista is slow on a fresh install, but the hard drive thrashing stops after you've used it for a day and it's populated superfetch and the index. It's fine to turn it off if you don't want to do indexed searches and don't want instant load on a few programs at the expense of a day of slowness, but it's also fine to leave them on, because they absolutely stop slowing anything down after that time.
Parent
Re:Windows Search 4.0?! (Score:5, Interesting)
I run Vista. index is enabled by default, but one of the first tweaks i did was switch it off, and Windows Search can be uninstalled/hidden.
The indexer runs as a "background" serivce, which is a new type and is supposed only get CPU cycles when the machine is idle. unfortunately, this only works for the FIRST instance of a background process, and there are many cases where more than one can conflict under Vista, and then indexing begins chewing up resources. I had it kick off in the middle of playing games when the CPU was over 80%.
WS4 will NOT be enabled on my machine. I keep the index service, pre-fetch, and several other services forcibally disabled on my machine. When I'm looking for something, it;s either an e-mail, which google or xobni instantly find for me without M$'s help, or it's a file I've properly store and can find myself in 3-4 clicks, or it;s a media item already indexed by iTunes... I don't search my personal machine for random crap, and anything I've ever needed to find on my own machine was ALREADY indexed by somethiung else.... It's a complete waste of resources, a waste of disk space for the index database, and every time you run a major patch, it fucking re-indexes, which for my 400+GB of stuff, takes as long as defragging.
This is not to mention that is also searches inside files, and stores that data in a database in a predetermined location. I have data in docs on my system I'd just as much prefer NOT be in a non--encrypted central repository... contacts, SSNs, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, all go in that database that is VERY easy for a hacker to lift...
If there's a way to uninstall WS4 after SP2, not just disabling it, I will.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I actually love it for work. The amount I search email and documents, it does a great job. You have to remember that it isn't just a plain txt file search, but it indexes doc and your outlook information. Being able to type in my last name and get a list of 68000 items in 1-2 seconds is pretty sweet.
I've tried Google Desktop as well, but just wasn't as much of a fan. I had a harder time getting it to index properly and do what I wanted. WS4 gives you some pretty fine grain control over what and where i
Wireless streaming (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder if they have fixed the throttling bug where if you're streaming media over a wireless link, Vista throttles the connection down so much that it causes buffer underruns and severe clipping. I can't listen to FLACs in VLC unless I set buffering to at least 20 seconds.
SP2 in A.U. (Score:4, Informative)
Well, maybe it isn't, but my Vista Home Premium at work "complained" this morning it had a new update, which was SP2, I let it download and play with it, now it's installed and it seems to work ok up to now.
Re:SP2 in A.U. (Score:4, Informative)
It's being "phased" out. Your machine was one of the lucky 1% that got the update now. My home machine did not have it automatically, but doing a "check for updates now" populated it. I'm waiting a few days to install it however until 1)I get around to making another image backup and 2) other people try it and fail first...
Parent
Vista SP2 (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm hoping that SP2 doesn't break the functionality of my HTPC like Windows 7 did. I tried Windows 7 x64 RC on my HTPC for about a week or so, but my sound card (X-Fi Extreme Audio PCI-Express x1 slot) developed some major problems that caused MCE to crash and WMP to crash.
I went back to Vista on it. I'm happy enough with the Media Center in Vista that I doubt I'll use Windows 7 on this box in the future, even though the UI of Windows 7 Media Center seems to be a little less "cluttered". My biggest complaint about Vista is the format of the recordings you make. I cannot seem to easily manipulate the resulting recordings very well at all, and I have to rely on MCEBuddy to convert the recorded shows to a format (H264) I can then use on other systems and OSes. ( I know, I know...DRM can suck my salty balls)
From a usability standpoint though, Windows 7 seems superior to Vista in the installation process, as well as the Desktop UI. I am surprised that they don't just convert the installed Vista base to Windows 7 for the simplicity of support. (well maybe not "surprised". it "is" MS, afterall)
It Just Works (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been a longtime XP user. I use Ubuntu and RHEL at work. I use linux and unix. I hated Vista with a passion, thought it was a PIA and had so much config problems. I then bought a new PC (quad core 6GB ram, blah blah) so I figured I'd put Vista on it. First time worked ok. I updated my bios, it blew away my Raid 1. Got irritated and stopped screwing with it. Then SP2 came along in the last few weeks and I reinstalled my OS and installed SP2 over it.
It just works. Works perfectly. So simple to install Vista and simple to install the SP2. 2 reboots and I had everything working. Fixed the RAID issue, fixed the bluetooth issue, fixed some other quirks that drove me batshiz crazy.
I gotta say that I used to hate vista with the passion of a 1000 firey suns. Now I'm like "Well it's not too bad, what's the problem with it again?"
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:5, Informative)
No one's using Vista anyway.
What are you talking about?? Plenty of people are using Vista. My Website's stats show (For the month of May until today): Windows XP 57.5 % Windows Vista 22.5 %
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:5, Interesting)
Numbers of page view per platform on the last 12 month of a little european website:
Page Views
Platform Sum %
(blank) 231,944,487 14
AIX 63,675 0
AmigaOS 1,399 0
BeOS 1,145 0
CP/M 26,258 0
DOS 28,158 0
Dreamcast 319 0
HP-UX 1,405 0
IRIX 2,535 0
Linux 10,782,630 1
Macintosh 22,543,401 1
NetBSD 1,930 0
OS/2 6,449 0
OSF1 1,000 0
OpenVMS 383 0
SCO_SV 38 0
Slurp 61,242,836 4
Solaris 7,625,811 0
SunOS 197,176 0
Unix (unknown) 67,609 0
WebTV 2,111 0
Windows 12,050,352 1
Windows 16-bit 11,607 0
Windows 2000 132,118,040 8
Windows 32-bit 6,226,532 0
Windows 95 723,941 0
Windows 98 32,166,513 2
Windows CE 107,696 0
Windows NT 5,474,837 0
Windows Sever 2003 19,986,701 1
Windows Vista 30,442,927 2
Windows XP 1,012,030,914 62
unknown 39,486,905 2
TOTAL 1,625,367,720 100
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:4, Funny)
SCO_SV 38 0
Sco_SV has 38 users? Why haven't we seen a SCO doubles market share article?
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:4, Informative)
Which, of course, are all thanks to Microsoft's monopoly, which you're supporting by still using Windows. Not trying to cause trouble, but there's no point complaining about a problem if you're still part of the problem.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No one's using Vista anyway.
No, but many are forced to tolerate it.
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:5, Informative)
I totally agree, I have been using Vista 64bit for over a year now, it has crashed on me twice in that time. My XP machine is far less stable.
Now, I'm not going to argue about Vista's stability, it's the speed and general bloat I have problems with, but seriously, what the fuck are all you people doing to your XP installations?!
I barely maintain my system at all, much to my disdain, but I haven't had it freeze/crash/BSOD/whatever in the past 3 years (well, a few times, but they don't count because it was faulty hardware, not software) and I torture the hell out of this computer!
Parent
Vista in the enterprise (Score:4, Informative)
I am sure Vista is fine with the latest software, and for personal use. However, have you tried deploying Vista in an enterprise environment (or use older software for that matter)? Here is a small list of issues that have caused us to stop looking at Vista for a rollout:
1. Group Policy management (the move to admx files has caused numerous backwards compatibility issues)
2. The ever-growing winsxs folder. There is no way to shrink or compress it.
3. Try creating images with default software for imaging workstations due to #2.
4. In-house applications need to be recoded.
5. Minimum requirements for Vista would require a major purchase of machines to be able to run it.
6. Activation process fails ~1/3 of the time, even when trying to use an in-house key server.
7. Random core dumps on Dell Latitude laptop line (have had 8 of them do this), even with the latest drivers and firmware.
Parent
Re:Vista in the enterprise (Score:5, Informative)
So your programmers wrote shitty code that failed to follow standards. Other people can write software which runs on Windows 95 through Windows 7 - the fact that your programmers didn't/couldn't is hardly a failing of Vista.
One third of the time? I've watched Vista computers take memory, graphics cards, CPU upgrades and activate and reactivate without issue. If activation was failing 33% of the time on any kind of scale, there would be outrage (of the real kind, not the angry-geek-at-Slashdot kind). "Using your in-house key server" points a bit differently, too. My guess? You're doing something the wrong way. Very much the wrong way.
Parent
Re:Vista in the enterprise (Score:4, Informative)
I can't believe I'm sticking up for vista, but.....
2. winsxs folder. This is actually a folder full of hard links. Its isn't _really_ 10gb. some info here [winvistaclub.com]
4. I've had maybe half a dozen compatibility issues with vista since I started using it over two years ago. In my current job there is a crapload of dodgy activeX web apps and VB6 apps, none have a problem. The ODBC drivers we use for connections to an informix database works _fine_ in vista, and the dates on those binaries is 1996. Infact, they work better in vista than in XP or anything else. Certain types of connections with these drivers never worked at all in applications deployed with ClickOnce on XP.... but in vista they work fine.
7. I got vista preinstalled 2+ years ago on a Dell Latitude D820. At that stage I had a lot of bluescreens etc caused by the USB stack, video drivers etc etc but since SP1 came out it has been rock solid. I use suspend/resume and I only ever reboot my machine if there is an update I want to install. I guess it probably gets rebooted on average every 6 weeks or so. I don't think I've had a bluescreen in at least 12 months.
You may well be right on your other points, I don't know. Vista still has issues and feels very bloated compared to 7, but IMHO it is a shame it has struggled to throw off the bad reputation it gained when it launched.
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think UAC is great. I get home from work and my daughter says "What's your password because I need to install XYZ" and I smile. I can let her do as she pleases on my laptop and not worry about her install the latest Malware, Crapware (iTunes), etc.
The only time I've grumbled is when Firefox auto-updates while she's using it and it can't finish its upgrade without my password. (great engrish Inda)
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:4, Insightful)
As for Firefox auto-updates, that is firefox's fault. I've had goofiness when I hit cancel on the privilidge escalation dialog, but IMHO Firefox should be able to just continue working nomrally if it doesn't update.
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Doesn't make a difference. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:UTC Timestamp? (Score:5, Informative)
UTC is a time format, and specifies GMT.
With UTC timestamps, two files written simultaneously in Germany and Canada would have the same timestamp. In Windows, without UTC timestamps, they would have two completely different timestamps, because they would (most likely) use local time.
If you want a more informed source, try Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_Universal_Time [wikipedia.org]
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Er... except that UTC timestamp only specifies the timezone, not how it's actually stored.
It's up to libc to know how it's stored and convert it to unixtime as appropriate.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"New names"? The entire world has been using UTC as an international standard for timekeeping since before you were born and were calling it UT or GMT for a hundred years before that. Can we please try to learn about something instead of just whinging about it?
Re:Secure... lol (Score:4, Funny)
I disagree.
Just installed Vista SP2. Let me tell you it is the most secure and stab
[NO CARRIER]
Parent
Re:Secure... lol (Score:5, Funny)
That tells you how good SP2 is. Even when his computer DOES go down, the PC manages to save his message, append "[NO CARRIER]" to it, and post it as anonymous. Let's see Linux do that!
Parent
Re:Secure... lol (Score:5, Funny)
Windows Vista Service Pack 2 Released
Will everybody please stop calling it Vista SP2? It's called Windows 7 for fuck's sake!
Parent
Re:You Joke, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually there are many good reasons to drive a manual car. Total control on performance, fuel consumption, and generally not being a lazy geezer.
Parent