Skip to comments.Windows Vista SP1
Posted on 12/21/2007 12:38:32 PM PST by Positive
MicroSoft is making the Release Candidate for Windows Vista Operating System available to the public at the URL link above.
I very recently purchased a new computer which came with Vista, there have been many "gliches" in using this new computer with Vista.
I finished installing the Sevice Pack RC about 6 hours ago and I've found significant improvement in the performance and stability of the system.
My personal tips:
1) The download is approximately 448MB in size so you you might want to consider your download speed when and if you choose to download this RC.
2) The install process can take an hour or more depending on your computer and automatically reboots several times, otherwise it is pretty automated.
3) Note again this is a "Release Candidate," this means that it is beyond the Beta testing stage but may not be the actual final final which is referred to as "Release To Manufacturing."
4) I you consider installing it, keep in mind that when it comes time to install the RTM, the RC will have to be uninstalled first, so the overall process of installing the RTM would take longer than if you waited for SP1 RTM.
As I mentioned, I have found significant improvement in just a few hours, for what that's worth. But CYA.
SP 3 for XP is quite a better performer.
I have Vista on a new computer and not had any problems.
What is it that Vista does so badly?
Every time I exited IE, Vista would tell me that IE had stopped running then it would close and reopen without my doing anything further.
Overall slow performance.
All of the above improved or eliminated... There were some other things, but I've have to go now. Needless to say, Microsoft would not be releasing a Service Pack if service wasn't needed.
Wow, is anyone actually using Vista? I always think of Vista and the one button Mac mouse in the same thought. Two stupid, useless things nobody wants or uses.
I have had that happen before. How long did it take SP1 to download?
“The download is approximately 448MB in size...”
So I guess Microsoft is now a big player in broadband?
Because they must expect all their poor customers to have it.
Happy I’ve stayed with Win XP Pro
“Wow, is anyone actually using Vista?”
It sure seems like an underperformer (at least in business terms).
I haven’t used Vista yet...and after hearing about some people demanding
“retro-migration” back to Win XP from Vista, I may never use it.
There are a few less-than-complimentary articles about Vista here:
It is just amazing to me how poorly MS misjudged the market. I never really thought they were huge geniuses anyway, I think most of their success was simply, “no one ever got fired for buying MS’ but this such a huge misstep even for a marginally competent company.
The one thing that it coincides with, which I don’t believe it is meaningful, though maybe it is, I don’t know, but Bill Gates is divesting himself of all his stock to put into some charitable foundation, or something.
So, right at the same time Bill Gates decides to do that, MS releases their worst OS upgrade ever.
It strikes me as interesting but I don’t think it is meaningful.
Agreed, but it is a Release Candidate (like Vista SP1). Now that I have, for the most part, Service Pack 3 for XP and that it is working perfectly, I have even less incentive to upgrade to Vista.
My cable ISP gives me 6 megabits download, so I would guess that it took 15 - 20 minutes.
I have a question.
Does anyone know?
Can you still buy XP?
The reason is, I bought an old server board (ASUS CUR-DLS), which is a dual processor PIII at 1 GIG. I put 2 1/2 Gig of RAM on it.
Nice little setup. But Win2K has a little problem with the USB. XP might have fixed it.
So I’m tryin to find out if I can still get XP. I refuse VISTA. Period. My sister bought a machine and says it’s junk. They don’t even turn the computer on anymore.
You bet you can; probably through the spring of 2008. See the link:
This is just and assumption but I think if a large original equipment manufacturer still offers XP then the software must also be available.
Almost a year later and millions are still demanding XP. That’s sad.
Admittedly, Apple’s OS X wasn’t doing great within a year of its release, but then it was a mostly brand-new operating system, not an upgrade to an existing codebase like Vista, and they didn’t have over five years of dedicated development time before release.
Banner ad on the Dell web site:
> Needless to say, Microsoft would not be releasing a Service Pack if service wasn’t needed.
I don’t know how to respond to this. First, the concept that MS would be rational just blows my mind — and then the scattered pieces of brain-stuff are tromped and stomped by the concept that MS might someday, ever, release a product that *didn’t* need a service pack...
It's clear to me that a lot of people have a lot of negative energy dedicated to MicroSoft and particularly Windows.
I have no energy invested in this subject positive or negative.
I am curious though. If I recall correctly, and I may not (I'm old) I read that Windows 95 consisted of over 11 million lines of code. Would this be considered a very large and complex endeavor in the world of software? Does the Windows OS support more hardware configurations that any other OS? If the answer to those two questions is yes, wouldn't service packs and updates be just inevitable?
I'm not trying to defend MSFT, it just seems to me that this is such an world wide scale effort that a commitment to perfection prior to release would result in no release...
Through June, 2008 (M$ extended the cut-off).
Be aware that post-Vista hardware will likely not have XP drivers available anywhere, so use pre-Vista hardware.