PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft Releases Vista SP2


modeps
05-26-2009, 11:16 AM
http://evavhost.com/i/news/vista.png

FiringSquad (http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=21683) has news that Microsoft released their next Service Pack for Vista. It comes in two flavors and requires that SP1 is installed before installing SP2.

Windows Vista x86 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=a4dd31d5-f907-4406-9012-a5c3199ea2b3&DisplayLang=en)
Windows Vista 64-bit (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=656c9d4a-55ec-4972-a0d7-b1a6fedf51a7&DisplayLang=en)

Rommel
05-26-2009, 11:26 AM
Is this the patch that adds the usability?

modeps
05-26-2009, 11:26 AM
Is this the patch that adds the usability?

This guy = comic genius.

MasterEvilAce
05-26-2009, 11:55 AM
I made a bet with a friend and told him I'd skip Vista entirely. Fortunately, Windows 7 has made that bet so easy (I'm running the RC)

Regardless, patches/fixes/improvements are never a bad thing

brandonjclark
05-26-2009, 12:04 PM
I made a bet with a friend and told him I'd skip Vista entirely. Fortunately, Windows 7 has made that bet so easy (I'm running the RC)

Regardless, patches/fixes/improvements are never a bad thing
I had this really long thing typed up.. but screw it. You missed the boat along with all the other people on that MojaveExperiment commercial.


"Oh really, it's Vista?"

HAHAHAHAHHAA

Frostburn
05-26-2009, 12:29 PM
I'm running Vista SP2 now and it works just fine, as did SP1. Before that there were issues, mostly with older hardware or bad drivers. I'm very happy with Vista now and have no problems with it at all. Having said all that, Windows 7 is a HUGE improvement over Vista in many ways and is certainly the better of the two.

LilAbner
05-26-2009, 12:35 PM
Not much to see here, go about your business and ignore the meh.

brandonjclark
05-26-2009, 12:37 PM
I'm running Vista SP2 now and it works just fine, as did SP1. Before that there were issues, mostly with older hardware or bad drivers. I'm very happy with Vista now and have no problems with it at all. Having said all that, Windows 7 is a HUGE improvement over Vista in many ways and is certainly the better of the two.

Yes, Windows 7 is better, it'd better be.

Just as XP and Server 2003 was better than Win200Pro and Win2000Server.

Noone wanted to believe that at first, though. And in this day in age, with babies crying to their mommy's on the Interwebs left and right cause they have older hardware, Microsoft is forced to push out Windows 7 before it could complete development of key features, namely WINFS.

brandonjclark
05-26-2009, 12:44 PM
Not much to see here, go about your business and ignore the meh.

I'm not sure what you do for a living, but Microsoft releasing a major Service Pack upon its current Client OS and current Server OS is to millions of people are very large deal.

Feel lucky you don't have to deal with the planning, testing and deployment of these service packs.

net7runner
05-26-2009, 12:48 PM
Still usin' XP. Tried Vista. Blech. Windows 7 promising. Brandon's love of service packs perplexing.

Rhaze
05-26-2009, 01:11 PM
Lol @ Vista Service Pack.

Seriously, if you want an OS that not a pain in the ass, use the Windows 7 RC. Been using it for a couple weeks now and it's fantastic.

automaton
05-26-2009, 01:12 PM
Microsoft is forced to push out Windows 7 before it could complete development of key features, namely WINFS.

Microsoft has been working on WinFS almost as long as 3D Realms worked on DNF. It was supposed to be in Vista so don't give me that shit about rushing Win7 out before they could finish it. MS has had plenty of time to get WinFS under the hood of Vista first and now Win7.

brandonjclark
05-26-2009, 01:19 PM
Still usin' XP. Tried Vista. Blech. Windows 7 promising. Brandon's love of service packs perplexing.

Not perplexing, but a serious project that demands attention in the IT field.

It's not surprising I tell people to stay away from IS degrees.

brandonjclark
05-26-2009, 01:24 PM
Microsoft has been working on WinFS almost as long as 3D Realms worked on DNF. It was supposed to be in Vista so don't give me that shit about rushing Win7 out before they could finish it. MS has had plenty of time to get WinFS under the hood of Vista first and now Win7.

WRONG! WinFS has been in development since '03, all that crap leading up to it was completely different.

I've got a great idea, how about you re-define the entire worlds (oops, only 90% or so) file structuring method and see if you can do that while being asked to rush our Windows Vista. Oh, and then deal with whiny bitches again asking you to rush out Windows 7.

I believe that WinXP was fine until the proper OS had time to develop. Sadly, rushed development won out. Luckily, Vista has not been as bad as some OS's first couple of years (XP).

BabyJesus
05-26-2009, 01:30 PM
WINFS has been in development since long before Vista. They've had plenty of time. Windows 7 has little or nothing to do with it not coming out.

Gedd
05-26-2009, 01:40 PM
I had some issues with Vista in the past which kept me on XP x64 but it's now my current OS (Vista Business x64). No complaints these days. Drivers are stable, all my hardware and peripherals are supported and I haven't crashed. All my games run as good or better than XP x64.

I used to have a problem in Vista with getting a lot of NVLDDMKM.SYS timeouts, but that was my defective PSU's fault - not putting out enough juice under a heavy graphics load (Stalker, Crysis, etc.).

(no overclocks, air cooled - old Antec full ATX tower)
Q6600 on an Asus Rampage Formula (x48 chipset)
Corsair HX1000W PSU (previously had an Ultra X3 1000 - crapped out in less than a year)
8gb DDR2 1066 G.Skill
BFG GTX 280 OCX
SB X-Fi Titanium PCI-E
x2 WD RaptorX 150gb in Raid 0 array
Original model Logitech G15 keyboard

Apushmataha
05-26-2009, 02:10 PM
I got Vista 32 when SP1 came out and haven't had any problems. I switched to 64-bit in January and no complaints. I am really interested in what performance enhancements this will bring (if any). I'll be expecting benchmarks from Maximum PC soon!

saulob
05-26-2009, 03:02 PM
I got Vista since the first release. Never went back. Better than XP for sure.

see colon
05-26-2009, 04:01 PM
My one and only complaint with Vista (and it is fixed in 7) is that there can only be one functional graphics driver in use at one time. Not such a big deal for most people, but if you wanted to, say, run an ATI card for graphics and an nVidia card for physics... you can only do that running XP or 7.

The people who skipped Vista really did miss a solid offering from Microsoft. If you are a media-centric person who likes streaming video or audio to set top boxes in any room, or likes watching TV on their PC (using a tuner), or likes to play games with everything cranked without resorting to 3rd party cobb-job fixes to add some sort of "almost as good as DX10 but not quite" features, Vista is for you.

Anenome
05-26-2009, 05:10 PM
Two years ago I was buying a new computer and almost bought Vista. Last minute, I went with XP, and am glad I did. Like many, I hope to skip Vista along with the rest of the sane people :P

Anenome
05-26-2009, 05:13 PM
Isn't Windows 7 also 64-bit only? Man, I remember the huge upgrade from 16-bit to 32. Windows 3.0, that was a trip. I'm part of the shrinking minority that still knows their way around a DOS prompt :P

see colon
05-26-2009, 05:33 PM
Windows 7 comes in 32bit as well, much to my distress.

MasterKwan
05-26-2009, 05:35 PM
On the laptop I use for car tuning, 1.6 Ghz duo-core with 4G of ram. I have 2 hard disks, so, I can do back to back testing. In practice, 7 is no faster than Vista and XP is far faster than both. That being said, on my big iron machines, I have vista and 7 installed. 7 is prettier but, not functionally better.

If you install the 7 RC, look at task schedular, out of the box mine looked like it was doing a bunch of phone home to microsoft.

see colon
05-26-2009, 06:00 PM
If you install the 7 RC, look at task schedular, out of the box mine looked like it was doing a bunch of phone home to microsoft.
SHUSH! You'll spook the "Vista sucks but 7 is awesome" crowd.

MasterEvilAce
05-26-2009, 06:19 PM
I had this really long thing typed up.. but screw it. You missed the boat along with all the other people on that MojaveExperiment commercial.


"Oh really, it's Vista?"

HAHAHAHAHHAA

Did I miss out? Did I really?
How much did you pay for Vista?
Guess how much $$ and headache I saved by not buying Vista....

<3 Windows 7.

gzsfrk
05-26-2009, 09:41 PM
I'm one of those people who's running a painfully outdated setup--P4 Prescott 3.0ghz (garbage--I know), 1GB DDR1, and a Radeon 9800. Ran XP great, World of Warcraft smooth as silk with full graphics settings at 1280x1024 (which was the reason for my last hardware refresh back in February of 2005). WoW was the last PC game I played, and I've been pretty much an exclusive console gamer since then. Thus, I really haven't had a need to upgrade, as the only thing I use my home desktop for nowadays is a Skype and file server.

I had a free copy of Vista Ultimate (participated in the beta through work), so I loaded it on that system. And it was just awful. Even after SP1, it just crawled. Granted, that was an archaic system that had no business running Vista Ultimate. But still--I thought it was a bad move on MS' part to make it run so poorly on systems that were decent just a couple years prior.

But I recently decided to load Windows 7 RC1 on it, and I was genuinely shocked at how well it ran. Menus are snappy where they lagged before, file operations are TONS quicker. Overall, it runs about as well as I ever remember XP running.

And even though I plan up upgrading to a Phenom quad-core system the next time the barebones kit goes on sale at TigerDirect, I think it's a nothing but a good thing that MS have optmized Win7 to the point that it will run acceptably well on older systems and blazing fast on current high-end systems.

brandonjclark
05-26-2009, 10:22 PM
Did I miss out? Did I really?
How much did you pay for Vista?
Guess how much $$ and headache I saved by not buying Vista....

<3 Windows 7.

Yes, Yes.
Zero for Vista Ultimate. {my work is a Technet Subscriber}
None.

BTW, I love 7, too. But there's a lot of hate for Vista which is unrealized, IMO. That's the gist of it, to me.

brandonjclark
05-26-2009, 10:27 PM
I'm one of those people who's running a painfully outdated setup--P4 Prescott 3.0ghz (garbage--I know), 1GB DDR1, and a Radeon 9800. Ran XP great, World of Warcraft smooth as silk with full graphics settings at 1280x1024 (which was the reason for my last hardware refresh back in February of 2005). WoW was the last PC game I played, and I've been pretty much an exclusive console gamer since then. Thus, I really haven't had a need to upgrade, as the only thing I use my home desktop for nowadays is a Skype and file server.

I had a free copy of Vista Ultimate (participated in the beta through work), so I loaded it on that system. And it was just awful. Even after SP1, it just crawled. Granted, that was an archaic system that had no business running Vista Ultimate. But still--I thought it was a bad move on MS' part to make it run so poorly on systems that were decent just a couple years prior.

But I recently decided to load Windows 7 RC1 on it, and I was genuinely shocked at how well it ran. Menus are snappy where they lagged before, file operations are TONS quicker. Overall, it runs about as well as I ever remember XP running.

And even though I plan up upgrading to a Phenom quad-core system the next time the barebones kit goes on sale at TigerDirect, I think it's a nothing but a good thing that MS have optmized Win7 to the point that it will run acceptably well on older systems and blazing fast on current high-end systems.

Do you remember when XP came out? Remember all the people complaining about the bloat, how slow it was compared to Win2000?

Vista is the same thing. Look how long it took to make XP secure and stable {SP2}. Now, apply that amount of time to Vista and you have Windows 7. Microsoft could've released a service pack that upgraded everything Vista does, much in the same way SP2 for XP changes a lot of the kernel. But then noone would buy it because it was still Vista.

The OS software market has become more and more "what have you done for me lately" and Microsoft was forced to put out Windows 7 (upgraded Vista, make no mistake) early.

That's my opinion.

Syl
05-26-2009, 10:54 PM
I've been using the release candidate of Vista Service Pack 2 for a very long time. I'm extremely fond of Vista, even moreso after the RC service pack 2.

My only issue is that I believe i'll need to uninstall my RC SP2 in order to upgrade to the actual version; but considering that i've *never* had any issues with vista - no crashes, no slowdown, no program incompatibilities that i was unable to quickly fix. I can't wait for 7.

Noman
05-27-2009, 12:29 AM
Vista x64 is the best gaming OS on PCs. It has been like that for more than an year now. The performance improvement (due to superfetch) for even 32bit games like Oblivion was enough to justify the price ($68 for Home Premium's upgrade version).

I have Windows 7 RC installed on another hard-disk, and I fail to see what's so different compared to Vista. The sound stack, security model, GUI, superfetch etc are all same. If you never tried Vista (or tried it two years back and gave up) and if you like Windows 7, then you missed out on having a rock solid and very high performance 4GB system sooner.

The only change worth mentioning (from Vista to Win7) is the ability to run different graphic drivers on the same PC and there are also few minor tweaks in distributing/scheduling of threads on multi-core CPUs. The two OS are largely the same.

baz
05-27-2009, 02:05 AM
I used vista on my old system and it wasn't super stable, so I went back to XP. As soon as I upgraded my system earlier this year I installed Vista again and it's been rock solid. I just think quite a few crappy drivers for older hardware have marred peoples opinion of it.

I use Vista Premium 64 at home and Windows Server 2008 at work and have no problem with either install.

DocOblivion
05-27-2009, 02:10 PM
Any problems I had with Vista were resolved with SP1.
Once SP1 came out and proved itself, I made the jump and switched my server (Phenom 9580 QuadCore 2.35Ghz, 4GB Ram) from Linux to Vista Ultimate 64 SP1, and have no complaints whatsoever... it's been terrific!

I'll be closely watching SP2 both from a professional and personal perspective!

blackzc
05-28-2009, 04:52 AM
Lol @ Vista Service Pack.

Seriously, if you want an OS that not a pain in the ass, use the Windows 7 RC. Been using it for a couple weeks now and it's fantastic.

Ive used 7 and its good but vista works fine to..

Not sure what all the fuss was about. Anyway other than 7 feeling faster than vista (which is does), the benchmarks have them trading wins.

Samstag
05-28-2009, 06:45 AM
Not sure what all the fuss was about. Anyway other than 7 feeling faster than vista (which is does), the benchmarks have them trading wins.

They're roughly the same speed until you start running out of memory, which Vista will do much sooner. I run 7 on an old laptop with 1 gig ram and it performs great. When I tried to run Vista SP1 on a much newer laptop with 1 gig ram it was unuseable. After upgrading to 3 gig it runs fine.

see colon
05-28-2009, 03:25 PM
Perhaps those with only 1GB or ram are the ones who feel Vista is slow. That's something I hadn't considered before, because I had 1GB before XP came out. It cost a fortune back then, but now you can get, what, 8GB for about $100?