| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Rumor: No Vista SP1 Until 2009? | |
|
||
| Time: 00:22 EST/05:22 GMT | News Source: WinBeta | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
It cannot be stressed enough that this is purely a rumor at this point and that nothing has been confirmed by Microsoft. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 178 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:03:34 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 82452 (131.91.220.146) at 7/25/2007 6:59:45 AM |
| =w= |
| #2 By 73040 (68.12.29.94) at 7/25/2007 8:58:27 AM |
|
hahah No way.People need to quit making up this stuff
|
| #3 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 7/25/2007 9:15:07 AM |
|
That would be downright criminal.
Though I've heard that's when the next Ultimate Addition will ship as well :) -Larry |
| #4 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 7/25/2007 9:29:38 AM |
|
Perhaps, the purpose of this is to motivate those people--who would otherwise wait to install Vista until after SP1 is released--to just go ahead and upgrade now.
The linked article (in German) had some juicy quotes that provide a clear-headed and obvious counter to the zealot-driven propaganda here. |
| #5 By 20 (66.68.61.203) at 7/25/2007 10:07:38 AM |
| MS should just birth the baby and deliver an SP1 with a few hotfixes and one new feature, just so the "I won't install an SP0" losers can shut up. |
| #6 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 7/25/2007 10:10:55 AM |
|
Clearly an effort to draw out MS and force them to refute this and provide more details about the actual planned release data.
"MS, don't fall for it - drive your own car." Vista, owing to how Windows Updates is now a full desktop application native to the OS, does not need a service pack. Further, this is where XP SP2, the mother of all service packs, has really hurt MS and Vista. The expectation about what a service pack is designed to offer and actually do, has in part, been shaped by XP's SP2. SP2 as we all know, emerged as a necessary pack for XP in response to how the use of the public networks and Internet changed so much between 2001 and 2004/05 - all of us [admins], all went through this change - where security and our work to strengthen it changed everything. Have we forgotten that? People across the board need to recognize that SP's are less significant in the enterprise today - since management systems are so much more evolved [people build and sustain their own roll-ups/images and WDS/BDD are the norm at this level]. Further down the line are WSUS and end users - who now, as I said, have a native app to patch and update systems. What MS has to do instead is speak to and market to how Vista has evolved - and those with an memory at all can tell you that it has matured at a rate far faster than previous versions of Windows. That's not shilling, it's just the truth. MS needs to focus on coverage in the context of devices and publish an online App that all may turn to see what works and what does not and what the solutions are that are available [yes, I know there is the readiness tool, but people need more]. They need to know more about how instrumentation works in Vista and how that drives the creation of solutions - once a user count rises abouve 500 people with the same problem, MS engineers are on it and solving it [sometimes in days]. In the future, MS can control this BS - by NEVER shipping features in an SP! Ship features and feature packs separately. Use the SP's to roll-up that which each already has access to. |
| #7 By 32132 (142.32.208.232) at 7/25/2007 11:03:17 AM |
|
When we bought a bunch of Acer's for labs last year we had a 20% failure rate in the first month.
I won't take anything an Acer exec says seriously .... ever. |
| #8 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/25/2007 11:21:07 AM |
|
#6: People want the Vista problems fixed. They don't really care what you call it: hotfix, service pack, upgrades, updates, whatever. Just deliver them. Hair-splitting over semantics is stupid.
#7: Hmm, so I guess you won't be taking anything MS says seriously either, considering the XBox has a 33% failure rate huh? Humour: http://hideapod.com/ |
| #9 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 7/25/2007 11:28:22 AM |
|
#4: on the surface, that seems like a reasonable explanation. I wonder too if there isn't a motivation internally to break the "wait for SP1" mindset of the industry in general. They kind of fed that mentality with a rather quick release of XP SP1, I think, but I can see why it isn't as necessary anymore (particularly with the slick way to integrate updates into existing system images with Vista--it's so simple and elegant).
On the other hand, I'm not sure it's really necessary or worthwhile to attempt to break that mindset. Whether Microsoft likes it or not, releasing an SP1 will do wonders for Vista sales, even if the number of fixes is relatively low. And at the same time, what's holding up enterprise adoption so far are not necessarily Vista issues, but app compatibility issues. It seems like this summer is when things have really picked up for "Vista-compatible" (and Office 2007-compatible) releases of many applications. We have several apps that won't be ready until August or September, and I worry more about the "SP0" versions of those apps far more than I worry about Microsoft's SP0 releases. I think Microsoft's quality bar for RTM tends to be much higher than that of a lot of the rest of the industry, sadly. |
| #10 By 32132 (142.32.208.232) at 7/25/2007 11:57:54 AM |
|
#8 What Vista problems? It runs smooth for me. You should try it.
I haven't seen Acer extend any warranties. Microsoft did the right thing. They should be applauded for it. |
| #11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/25/2007 12:39:49 PM |
|
#10: Parkkker, the Golden Child of Vista. Problems vexing everyone, but it runs flawlessly for Parkkker... in his sleep at night when he's dreaming of Redmond.
Yeah, they did the right thing... a year or two after denying there was any widespread problem. It got so bad that even their heavy spin reactor overheated from the stress of spinning how a 33% failure rate was an isolated incident. This post was edited by Latch on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at 12:41. |
| #12 By 32132 (142.32.208.232) at 7/25/2007 1:04:58 PM |
|
#11 You should try Vista someday. I don't expect you to be honest about it though.
My co-workers and friends who run Vista like it too. |
| #13 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/25/2007 1:23:02 PM |
| #12: I played with the NoPE release on my test server for awhile before nuking it in favour of Ubuntu. I needed something that saw all my hardware and "just worked" without phoning home to DoD/DHS. |
| #14 By 32132 (142.32.208.232) at 7/25/2007 1:31:20 PM |
| #13 Ha ha. Sure. What a loser. |
| #15 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 7/25/2007 1:56:01 PM |
|
#12 I like Vista but I do have plenty of problems with it. Yes a lot of them are drivers related but... not only.
While I am still running Vista 32 on my desktop I cannot deny that my frustration is growing day by day. To be honest I have to say that Office 2007 is even worst: whenvever Outlook is checking for emails, which happens every ten minutes, my system is on its knees if not hanging. Note that I use what I would at least call a "decent" box: Dell XPS 700, Intel Core 2 6700 2.66GHz, 2GB of RAM and two Nvidia 6800 no SLI. The bottom line is that just because you or I or anybody else like something this is perfect. When I was young I loved old English sport motorcycles: beautiful and full of problems. When I grew up, and I had less time available, I "had" to turn to Japanese ones: less magic feelings but clean pants and a lot of reliability. |
| #16 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 7/25/2007 2:03:53 PM |
|
#11... can't speak for Parkkker (he'll speak for himself, I'm certain ;), but it's running great for me--even on a system with integrated graphics driving two 1600x1200 monitors (though I just ordered a discrete card with 512 MB VRAM to free up some system RAM). I also ran the RCs at home on a substantially less powerful machine, and it ran great. I tried it on a machine with 512 MB--which is frustratingly slow once you open more than a couple apps--but with anything over 1 GB, it's very responsive. XP at the minimum specs was the same way when it came out.
I remember testing betas of 2000 back in 99 on a Celeron 400, and I thought "whoa... this is so slow... no one will buy it!" I thought the fade-in menus were a pointless waste of system resources, much like I'm sure many look at Aero/Flip3D/etc. It's funny, though, especially the way many articles read: "The resource-hungry Aero interface," etc. In reality, Aero contributes to system responsiveness, if anything (and this has been shown in many benchmarks). It only makes sense, since many GUI operations are now being offloaded. It does require more memory if you're using integrated graphics (shared system RAM), of course, but from a processing standpoint you're freeing up CPU cycles. At any rate, no problems are "vexing" me. I just am waiting for some Vista/Office 2007-compatible versions of a few apps... same as I did when XP came out. (BTW... did ADP ever release a compatible version of their payroll software for XP? Thank goodness we switched....) |
| #17 By 32132 (142.32.208.232) at 7/25/2007 3:06:37 PM |
|
#15 My box is slower than yours. AMD 5000+, 1GB ram, ATI 1300 Pro running 2 monitors - a 19" at 1280x1024 and a 20" at 1600x1200.
I ran RC1 and RC2 on a slower box, bought this one, ran RC2 on it, then ran XP SP2 on it for a month and then put Vista Ultimate on it. Vista is faster. I wouldn't go back to XP. |
| #18 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/25/2007 3:21:32 PM |
|
#16: I actually believe it, coming from you. It could boil down to a common, but not universal, combination of hardware and/or drivers. It seems ot affect so many users, yet others claim few to no problems at all. Meanwhile, the ideologues here will tell us that it's flawless, even when it's setting their PC on fire. Maybe this article can explain the Parkkkers of the world via the psychology behind this phenomena:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12125926 |
| #19 By 32132 (142.32.208.232) at 7/25/2007 4:00:50 PM |
|
I'm an ideologue because I won't lie for the FSF about Vista?
How sad. When is the Latch filter arriving? |
| #20 By 23275 (172.16.10.31) at 7/25/2007 4:20:11 PM |
|
Latch, it is not a matter of semantics as you assert.
Vista, unlike any other OS, has a native update app that is bolted to instrumentation and part of the larger Microsoft ecosystem. That is the point I made and have made many times in many ways. Please don't persist in confusing people about that. Solutions under Vista are a lot more granular than they ever were, and the fact is that an SP is simply not as relevant as it once was. |
| #21 By 23275 (172.16.10.31) at 7/25/2007 4:25:17 PM |
|
#18, As I have directed to you many times before, proof that Vista runs as well for me as I say it does, http://blog.libertech.net/blogs/lketchum/archive/2007/07/10/windows-vista-the-most-reliable-operating-system-i-have-ever-used.aspx
And, http://blog.libertech.net/photos/reliable/default.aspx There is no hiding from Vista's instrumentation - any slight error and it is recorded. Now this, not so special, used each day, all day media HUB, is picture perfect. Ask the guys here - how many have Performance and Reliability ratings as high - even on machines that run well. It is no small trick, but Vista does make it possible - and you doubt that, over and over. It makes no sense. |
| #22 By 1428 (64.237.163.236) at 7/26/2007 6:59:25 AM |
|
Hi Iketchum:
With XP, I always kept watching the system reports for errors and failures. I kept everything to perfection, as possible, and reported to Microsoft any deviations. I do the same in Vista using also the Reliability Monitor for a perfect 10. There are the programs I have used the last years, some are resident in Windows, others I had to buy or subscribe. Please let me know if you think I am missing any other. 01. Windows Updates 02. Windows Disk Cleanup 03. Windows Error-checking 04. Microsoft Baseline Security Analizer 05. Windows Live OneCare (some of the features) 06. Acronis True Image 10 Home 07. CCleaner 08. Startup Run 09. Registry Mechanic 10. Perfect Disk 11. Belarc Advisor Efrain Morales |
| #23 By 12071 (203.206.255.210) at 7/26/2007 7:53:15 AM |
|
Problems with Vista? Quick.. look the other way.. Windows 7 will come out soon that will fix everything! Rinse and repeat.
#22 Let me get this straight... you run 11 separate applications just to keep your Windows OS running? |
| #24 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 7/26/2007 9:31:38 AM |
|
#23, Clearly, Efrain runs various maintenance applications and procedures only periodically, or even once, in prudent efforts to either tune, maintain, or protect his PC.
#22, Efrain, that is a great list and certainly suggests why you are able to sustain a well running machine - even an XP box, as suggested from your list of steps. We've done very similar things in support of XP machines and harden each one we build. That said, there are a couple of things that you'd like as you move to Vista [assuming you may not have]. First, if you want to be secure from the moment you start Windows, run Vista Ultimate - which like Vista Enterprise edition for customers that can access it, uses "CornerStone" or secure start up. It secures a PC from the very first moment the machine boots and restricts access to its surface until all services are online - see this document http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/D/6/5D6EAF2B-7DDF-476B-93DC-7CF0072878E6/secure-start_tech.doc Also, head on over to Haute Secure http://hautesecure.com/index.aspx and regardless of OS [XP or Vista] use the program - it, alongside IE 7 in its Default Protected Mode on Vista is the best combination we have seen and tested for keeping a Windows Machine safer. Combined, Vista, IE 7 PM, <Securable Objects> Haute Secure, Windows Firewall, Defender and any good AV product will be more than enough to provide reasonable protection for a Vista PC user running as a standard user with UAC turned on. Move to 64bit and ASLR <Address space layout randomization> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Address_space_layout_randomization as soon as you can and you'll have one very tough PC to compromise. Thanks for your posts! |
| #25 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/26/2007 10:29:55 AM |
|
#23: Yeah, it's kind of crazy how Windows needs all these utils just to keep from getting 0wned or choking on itself.
|
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 178 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:03:34 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
