First Vista Service Pack Due Second Half of 2007 137
HuckleCom tipped us to an article on the Dark Reading site, stating that plans are already in the works for the first Windows Vista service pack. The pack is slated for release sometime in late 2007, and will target security improvements and Quality of Life issues that may spring up between January and the pack's release date. Microsoft is already looking for volunteers to help them test it. According to the email sent to Technology Adoption Program members, in order to get in on the ground floor IT shops will have to 'deploy pre-release builds into production environments and report back on the results.' As the article observes, Microsoft may be asking for a lot from their customers. Candidate releases of XP service packs had extremely deleterious effects when initially rolled out. There is no firm word for when in the year this pack will be released.
Yeah, right. (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be funny, if it weren't coming from Microsoft.
Quick Release? (Score:5, Insightful)
"I think i'll wait till they relase SP1 for Vista before I upgrade"
better wait for SP2!
WinXP (Score:5, Insightful)
Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Quick Release? (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that everyone waits for SP1 is the exact reason why they're releasing that first service pack so quickly.
"Quality of Life" == DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
I work in a small win32 shop and even we won't consider it for another couple of years.
The alternative my PHB is actually considering deploying 2003 server as a desktop. If you are used to thinking that Microsoft is very good stuff and find Vista generally bad, this kind of bizarre thinking takes hold. It is safe to assume that vista adoption is a forgone conclusion.
I make a decent wage babysitting Microsoft stuff. I specifically don't advocate any platform at work. That's my bosses decision. Though, if we switched to Linux I'm positive we'd do a whole lot less babysitting.
Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (Score:5, Insightful)
vista 2.0? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, kudos actually... (Score:3, Insightful)
#2) If MS said they were releasing one in 2 years, everyone here would be complaing that MS is slow, doesn't care about users or software quality. Catch 22 Slashdot issue uh?
#3) At least MS won't be CHARGING for this as they have never done with previous service packs, that have in the past offered many updates and new features to the OS. This is something the Apple fans cannot claim, as Apple trickles out only security updates, and then charges for a real service pack update. This is easy math, compute XP Cost from 2001 with all the service packs, hell even add in the virus scanning software you had to buy, then compare this to your OSX prices in the same amount of time. So which company seems to be milking their customers? Also don't scream about all the new OSX features in each release, most are fixes or updates to the software included, or the famous spotlight, which MS also offers their desktop search for free to XP users.
So SP1 in the first year, good for MS for once, actually giving customers attention instead of internal infighting...
Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think anyone is surprised that they're releasing SP1 so soon. It's just disappointing that it's lived down to expectations.
Re:Quick Release? (Score:3, Insightful)
And the exact reason even a "power user" like myself isn't even entertaining the idea of upgrading to Vista anytime soon. When I say "power user", I mean a consumer with above-average computer skills, but I'm not a professional. I fix friends PC's, but I don't build them. I can make just about any OS or program do what I want, but I don't write them. So my opinion comes from being a user who does understand both sides of the equation to a certain extent.
As someone who does not operate systems in a business environment, I can't speak for the usefulness of Vista in those situations. However, for my personal use and the tasks I use computers for, I can't find a single compelling reason to move to Vista. Not a single positive, but many negatives; I'm still running some very useful hardware that is on USB1.1 and/or has to run on legacy mode on XP, and I have everything finally running perfectly as I want it - why in hell would I want to upgrade to an OS just to get all my old devices that are still perfectly good and useful to work all over again?
There is just no reason I can see to disrupt my life with a new OS that is going to be even more of a system hog than XP is. I know the conventional wisdom is to think, "Gee, guess it's time to upgrade to a new PC," but since I have no other reason to do so that would just be silly. I burn DVDs - my system does that flawlessly (especially since I just got a new LG external burner that is a Godsend on sale for $75). I use BitTorrent. I browse the web and check e-mail. I edit video and audio. None of this is going to get any easier via Vista, and in fact as outlined above much of it will get more difficult.
XP isn't going anywhere in my house. Hell, I still have a laptop running ME because it's the newest OS it can handle - but it still does the basic tasks I need just fine and it will continue to serve me for years to come (I've had it since 1997). Sure, the big PC gamers will have to upgrade eventually, but since I just play consoles these days (XBOX360 and Wii) that's not a reason for me.
MS is throwing the same party for Vista it threw for XP - better, more secure, blah, blah...we've been here, done that, and learned our lessons. All that said, as a consumer the fact that the first SP is already in the works makes me distrust the product even more, and further solidifies my choice that Vista is going to remain on the horizon for me instead of in my home for a lot longer than MS would like.
AE
Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (Score:3, Insightful)
"Finished products," as Asimov remarked very early in the Foundation series, are the obsession of the decadent mind. You'll find a similiar observation in Parkinson's Law.
The modern OS distribution is always a work in progress. That is its fundamental strength and appeal. There is no loss to the consumer in a product that evolves and changes over time.
ARE THEY KIDDING US (Score:1, Insightful)
Ilya Elbert
http://www.computerrepairboston.com/ [computerrepairboston.com]
Re:Quick Release? (Score:1, Insightful)
And this is wrong, why? (Score:5, Insightful)
And what's wrong with that?
Would the community rather Microsoft not release any patches at all? Or not start working on them this early? Do you really think Microsoft is just going to give everyone a two-year vacation now that Vista has shipped? How responsible would that be?
Typical Slashdot response though.
Re:Quick Release? (Score:4, Insightful)
So instead of fixing Windows' security model, or reworking the flawed NTFS filesystem, they patch 'em up and give the patches catchy names!
Windows Defender (and other anti-spyware products don't protext against "flaws" in the security model, they protect against flaws in the user.
The fragmentation issue is _vastly_ overblown and defragging has no impact for 99% of people. It's there to soothe people who have had years of magazines telling them to "defrag" (which followed on from years of the same - actually applicable - advice about FAT[32]).
"Defragging" is much like "fixing permissions" in recent versions of OS X - nothing more than a placebo almost every time it's applied.