TechNet Users Revolt Over Vista SP1 Unavailability 203
I Don't Believe in
Imaginary Property writes "There's a growing revolt among Microsoft TechNet & MSDN subscribers
who are frustrated that they can't yet get Vista SP1 and test their software on
it. This can't be good news for anyone hoping that SP1 will have better
compatibility. While SP1 has been released to manufacturing, and pirate copies are easy to
find, Microsoft is withholding it from subscribers until early March.
According to the article, some frustrated users are upset enough that they plan
to abandon TechNet entirely and turn to piracy." Update: 02/12 17:37
GMT by KD : Sean0michael
writes, "Aaccording to the Technet blog, they have pushed up the date to before the end
of February, though no exact date is mentioned."
The Tabloid News For Nerds Which Is Slashdot (Score:2, Informative)
Last Friday, the company released Vista SP1 for download by both individuals and companies who previously beta tested the service pack. This week, the company went further. "At the end of this week we will be making the English version of Windows Vista SP1 available to volume licensing customers ... Other languages will follow soon ... [and] later this month, SP1 will be available to MSDN and TechNet Plus subscribers," Mike Nash, corporate vice president of Windows product management, said in a posting on the Windows Vista Team Blog today. The primary hold up for broadly releasing SP1 has been minor glitches involving device driver installation, basically requiring that some device drivers will need to be reinstalled after installing SP1. Volume Buyers to Get Vista SP1 Early [internetnews.com] [February 11]
Re:The Tabloid News For Nerds Which Is Slashdot (Score:5, Informative)
I can see why software makers are anxious (Score:3, Informative)
Re:PROTIP (Score:3, Informative)
If you don't believe me, check her write up on WWDC. http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=505 [zdnet.com] , in which case, she obviously never researched the features properly, and obviously didn't bother to research them, even while doing a follow-up on it, because the forums were full..
I think she just spoke to some guy at Microsoft, they said "yeah, its pretty much the same", and she goes "yeah, they are the same, they just changed the version".
What you will notice, is that nowhere, has she actually done anything to research that (ie, no comparison shots of changed files). Don't trust any info on SP1 at the moment. All the leaks I've seen have been proven fake thus far (ie, modified refresh 2's where it was hexed, but they forgot to change all the versions, or just refresh 2). I've even heard some idiots who base whats real or not on the filename.
Either way, until someone official from microsoft on MSDN says it, I'm not going to bother even trying SP1, otherwise, you may be stuck with a beta which wont upgrade to SP2, and I suggest everyone else do the same. Its only 2 or 3 weeks now until we know for sure
Re:PROTIP (Score:3, Informative)
Actually connect has the RTM downloads for SP1, the WU enabler and even the ISOs and distribution packages.
So whether anything changed from Refresh 2 doesn't matter, as the RTM is available.
Actually NO... (Score:1, Informative)
RTM has been available to beta testers, the ISO, the installation EXE, and even the WU enabler since the 6th.
MSDN and Technet should also have access to it now as well today. (Besides the fact that a majority of MSDN and Technet people have had beta access as well.)
This story is pure trash, and is just mis-informing more people, but hey it is MS so I guess that is ok to give people bad information...
Kung Fu Master says... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:The Tabloid News For Nerds Which Is Slashdot (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft did not plan on releasing SP1 early to technet. The debate is accurately described and attributed. Microsoft's stance as described in the article is also accurate as of the time the article was written and posted. That Microsoft later reversed its position is something to be noted, but it is not "trivial or misleading" to post an *accurate* rundown of the argument which led to Microsoft's reversal. (Which had not even happened at the time the article was written).
Unless you can show that Microsoft had planned on an early release for this base, I think you might want to rethink your position. It was articles like the Computerworld article which led to the release, not any policy decision by Microsoft before there was a lot of backlash.
Here is the official announcement on the board that started the whole thing:
http://blogs.technet.com/technetplussubscriptions/archive/2008/02/04/technet-plus-sp1-availability-plan-of-record.aspx [technet.com]
"Now that we've made Windows Server 2008 available to all TechNet Plus subscribers there is a firestorm of questions about when will SP1 also be available for subscribers.
The current plan is that it will be available in mid-March, if that changes I'll let you know. In the meantime, please check out Mike Nash's blog post to learn more about SP1 and the timing of the availability.
Have Feedback? Leave a comment - I looking forward to hearing from you.
Thanks,
Kathy Dixon
TechNet Plus subscriptions"
It was not until the 11th - today - that a new policy was mentioned. Your own counterargument is based on a post made this morning - several days after the article you say is misleading was posted. How was the Computerworld article misleading? It was 100% accurate when written and anyone can follow the link provided in the article and verify that. How could they know that Microsoft was going to change their policy? It was a stupid policy and led to a backlash and that was the story. The story is now that Microsoft needed to be pressured to do what they should have done in the first place.
Re:Actually NO... (Score:3, Informative)
"Should" being the operative word, which is what people are complaining about. It isn't there. I checked both MSDN and Technet today just in case. Apparently, you didn't.
Good job supporting the opinion you intended to criticize. I honestly couldn't have done better.
But it will be available this month! (Score:3, Informative)
FUD.
Re:Windows users are revolting? Seems unlikely. (Score:1, Informative)
*ducks*
Vista SP1 available later this month (Score:3, Informative)
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/02/11/windows-vista-sp1-availability-for-technical-customers.aspx [windowsvistablog.com]
Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)
The other big issue at home is games. I am a PC gamer, my favourite titles come out on PC and I play lots. All of them work in Windows. While some may be able to made to work in Linux, not all can, and I've found that they are often rather loose with their definition of "work". For me a working game would be one I could play all the way through with everything working and maybe some minor glitches. For them it often seems to be so long as it'll load and get in game that's working, regardless of playability.
Really what it comes down to is that everything I want runs in Windows. I can't think of a single app that I want to use that doesn't have a Windows version. That's not the case for Linux. So why would I want to move to something that causes me more trouble? What is the gain? I can appreciate evaluating tradeoffs, but for my home desktop especially, and even for work, it seems to be all negative almost no positive. I can't find anything I'd gain other than more Linux knowledge (by virtue of using it regularly) and there's a big list of what I'd have to give up or compromise on. As such it just isn't a good trade that I can tell.