Vista SP1 does not solve many problems

Saying that "SP1 does not solve many problems" only because users don't see any improvements is a stupid things to say. Many of the fixes included fixes _potential_ problems in certain configurations with certain applications and hardware. Many of which users may or may never experience, but they are still FIXES, which is what a service pack is all about. And the copy bug was one of them, one that people may actually see an improvement. If you are interesting to see what improvements SP1 brings then find the fixes list on MS website, and that list is LONG.

Apparently Microsoft's strategy of not detailing how many and what bugs have been fixed with SP1, is not to hide the amount that they're having to deal with, but to hide how few they've actually managed to deal with.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/4/a/f4a35b2b-2f62-4104-a3e6-5f7bc1318e9f/Notable%20changes%20in%20Windows%20Vista%20SP1.pdf

"The Windows Vista SP1 install process clears the user-specific data that is used by Windows to optimize performance, which may make the system feel less responsive immediately after install. As the customer uses their SP1 PC, the system will be retrained over the course of a few hours or days and will return to the previous level of responsiveness."

"As the customer uses their SP1 PC, the system will be retrained over the course of a few hours or days and will return to the previous level of responsiveness."

So, at what point do all the PCs become sentient and deem we are no longer necessary.

Hey whats wrong with my comp$%j 001001011.........

SP1 RC has made a dramatic improvement to my Vista experience and I was already happy. It seems to me that the media are leading the stupid people up the garden path on Vista. Leading them to believe perfectly normal computer problems are all Vista's fault. Apart from the wait for drivers - not MS' fault - I've enjoyed using Vista. Some people just don't like change as they don't realise that to evolve is to survive. They forget computers were never meant to be kept forever. If you're computer is older than 3 years, then you're behind the times and have no right to comment on a modern system release. I really hope the media don't kill Vista off.

Slipstream and fresh install is the only way to really see if any performance differences are out there.

Agreed, ive noticed quite an improvment from an unpatched vista to a SP1 version, but there is two things worth mentioning here, firstly

MS as stated on the record that SP1 WONT be a huge improvment as many of the updates where released as WU, if people bothered to listen to this they may will have not has such a let down

Secondly

its PCWORLD for christ sake!
Everyone under the sun knows that they havent got a clue, and the increase in time trying to work out what to do is probably because of all the crap they put on it with obscure hardware that is only compatible on that one PC!
[PC World's a magazine too, DT. MOD]

"Fear mongering" is exactly what YOU were just doing. "Fear mongering" is exactly what M$ does to try to strong arm you inot emptying your pockets out constantly to purchase newer products that shouldn't even be on the market yet. Why cant a computer last forever? My AthlonXP 2800 system with 1.5GB of ram and a 128MB GeForce4 Ti4200 AGP 8 card still does everything I need it to do in WindoZe XP. Im a grown up, I dont spend $400 on a video card so I can play the latest games, then another $50 per game. If I want to game, Id buy a console. "Fear mongering" is exactly what you just did..... trying to make people think that what they have is obsolete and they HAVE to replace it. BS. The fact is, the slowest computer available today is way more than the average home owner needs since most only check email, watch a few videos, and surf the web. I can understand "techies" always getting the latest and greatest available, thats just being a techie, its something you cant explain. The majority of end users do NOT need to upgrade their software, hardware and components as often as you and the manuf's would like us to believe. People are lazy, or they would do like a lot of us are doing right now, and move to Linux or Mac. According to those that practice "Fear mongering", I would have to spend over $2,000 every 2 - 3 years on a new system and new software to keep up with their claims that I need to upgrade to the best. Now then, I can do that, or, use something free....... like Linux, or even stick with XP.... which, after over 5 years............ is STILL being fixed!

Vista preloads many commonly used programs into RAM whent he computer is booted, this depends on user specific data. 

That data is cleares when SP1 is installed and your computer needs to "relearn" what you use the most. This data doesn't get sent to M$, it's simply there to help make your computer feel snappier. Don't be so paranoid, jeez.

"Some people just don't like change as they don't realise that to evolve is to survive." 

Vista isn't an evolution its a "devolution" at best, or you might even call it a freak of nature. Sorta like Windows ME was, thank god that passed fast.

For what reason is Vista being compared with ME? Probably by people not actually running Vista to begin with, more like folk on the bandwagon, dissing the big bully on the block
One actually works and the other was a piece of pale-coloured pachyderm from the start
ME's favourite colour was blue
VIsta's only problem is drivers, drivers developed by others, not Microsoft itself.
My experience has been very good. Yes, I've seen blue screens, but only associated with drivers not in M$ control, like I've said before. Comparing the Vista experience to XP, I can't say how many BSODs I saw with XP in one year, but in my one year with Vista, only 3, and only associated with driver by others
If you want to play the devils advocate, put numbers behind your claims, stop piping off if you can't back it
I'm looking forward to SP1

"As the customer uses their SP1 PC, the system will be retrained over the course of a few hours or days and will return to the previous level of responsiveness." 
Why in the hell should it need to be retrained. I want it to work right out of the box. Why should M$ know my computer habits? What's wrong with all of the sheep in this world?

"They forget computers were never meant to be kept forever. If you're computer is older than 3 years, then you're behind the times...." 
My my, Aren't we the obediaent little consumer? 
Also, I think you'll find plenty of dis-satisfied Vista users, just open your eyes.

I installed SP1 on my work laptop the other day. I'd been having a lot of problems with the computer taking forever to go to sleep (like 5-20 minutes) and since I'm constantly moving around it caused me a lot of headaches and my hope was to see some improvement in that area. I'm happy to report my laptop consistently goes to sleep within 30 seconds now! I also had a noticeable improvement in performance during day to day tasks.

XP Freezes up & Glitches often, in all individual systems. XP always will:due to Long Pipelines with Gigantic Multipliers.

Vista Ultimate is BIG gb, others are as big, Yet Vista RUNS FAR Superior. Its UNLIKELY fantastic difference will be made just thru service pack, its good to go, with someHardware yet to bring its bandwidth & controllers to maximum speed.

Yet, Ultimate Hardware will still give XP Boost, yet Vista Ultimate is just Plain Better in those same conditions & should test so. Try Vantage w sp1 & without, when available & better numbers to judge by will be result. e.g. just install it, von Drashek & i? did...

Signed:thomas stewart


I think.
It is definitely on my bucket list.
My collective bit by bit-bucket list.
How should I complain about how long it takes?

They are the Vole; they promised.

"Why in the hell should it need to be retrained."

To efficiently utilise the improved SP1 algorithms that precache to memory those parts of the drives that are most likely to be needed based on the user;s individual usage patterns.

"What's wrong with all of the sheep in this world?"

They listen uncritically to the ignorant bleatings of clueless mags and the nihilistic Inq.

Bored to death by the uninformed drivel about Vista.

B

I agree with the gist of your comment - no-one should be forced to buy new h/ware to use a 'new' OS - eg. - I have a 2yo webcam(Logi), which works beautifully in XP, no problems, yet Vista will never support it(Logi,?) and I MUST buy a new Vista-compat to have a webcam - lucky I don't use it or my Vista retail disk...I am however a 45 yo 'techie type', who spends, I admit, sometimes stupid ammounts of money(i'm not into dry-ice cooling and such though but I did just get my new EVGA780i and e8400, woot !! - 4.05ghz without a blush even!!):)) on new pc gear I actually use and yes, I play games - it's a hobby, good for pale skin and flabby bits...so plz, be understanding that not everyone does cars or boats or 'adult' things for recreation - online gaming with 63 other people from all over the world is fun, even an oldie like you may enjoy it!!!! I do however totally agree with your other sentiments - MS, shame on U, you are the weakest....wink?!!!
As for SP1 - good that we needed it in the first place hey??

Could anyone advise on the following conumdrum I have with XP and Vista?

A default install of XP comes in at around 1Gb. A default install of Vista Basic comes in at around 11Gb and has around similar (or less in some cases) functionality as XP.

What exactly is that 10Gb extra all about?

The success of the Xbox 360 negated the appeal of Vista as a gaming platform. The speed and stability of XP obscured any obvious benefits of Vista as an OS upgrade. If MS released a consumer version of Win2k and did nothing but bug fixes since 2000, things would've gone differently. Aero, Media Center, and IE7 would've been big selling points, and the anticipation would've been great. That's the price they pay for a job well done.

The WoW of course!
What else would you need 10 more gigs for?!
Sheesh... ;)

There are changes in Vista SP1 - 109 features, 390 new hotfixes. See http://4sysops.com/archives/what-you-have-to-know-about-windows-vista-sp1-109-features-390-new-hotfixes/

Alright for everyone out there saying upgrade your hardware, I still have Intel Pentium's running with 128 megs of RAM, I use these machines to browse the web and in my garage so I can look up specs on cars for repairs. They have Linux on them because 2 years ago I expired winblows 98. Since linux is still getting updated, NOT fixes, and runs just as fast and as smooth on my Pentium's!

Now to say the least I have taken an Intel 486 DX with 128 megs of RAM and installed Winblows XP on it and played Counter Strike 2 on it with steam! I can not do this with Vista! Horse **** I need to upgrade, the Vole needs to accommodate for the rest of the world, not the world accommodate for the Vole!

Also I beta tested Vista RC1 and RC2, when I upgrade, I made the unfortunate mistake of leaving one of my data drives in my computer which was formatted NTFS and Vista tried to convert it over and change ownership, it messed up and locked me out of my own data, I called the Vole to report the problem, to them this was a 1 time isolated incident which they have never run into before! I lost 40GB of data out of 150GB! I managed to recover the 110GB with a friend who is an administrator of a school district that already uses linux! He helped me hack the drive and recover most of the data, I still cry over the lost 40GB of data that I had saved data over the last 10 years!

I would go completely Linux if it wasn't for the fact that not all my programs, that I need, will not run on Linux.

Again I reiterate that the world should not accommodate for the Vole, but the Vole accommodate for the world. Linux does not "learn" how I use my computer, it does what I tell it to do and it does it fast, it doesn't need to pre-cache my every move. What that does is slows my computer down when I do something I don't normally do!

The ethics of the Vole are leading to it's demise, as many companies have already made the switch to alternatives. The prices of their software is a major reason of this! I refuse to pay $250 minimum to get Publisher with Vole office! Also if I have office XP that runs fine and I get Vista I refuse to upgrade to office '03 or '07, '07 especially since I can't figure out how to use the bloody thing! I don't have time to spend 20 hours to learn a new office!

I do own office '03 and I know most of the short cuts and have configured the toolbars to my liking and have made my efficiency increase. On office '07 you can not customize the toolbars! I will not switch, I have already on my other machines made the switch to Open Office and am looking to buy Star Office, Open Office with tech support.

Oh, and no I did not buy office '03 I won it at a tech competition and that's why I'm using it on my schooling laptop, other wise I would not have it!

It is there to check if Microsoft thinks you have the right to continue doing what you thought you had the right to do.
And if Microsoft thinks you do not, the wonderful added technology will keep you from opening your own home videos, your own spreadsheets, your own Word files, maybe even your home-taken pictures.
That is what it is for, and that is exactly why I will never have Vista on any machine I work with. Even if Vista worked twice as good as XP (which it is far from doing), I would not want it on that basis alone.
I am sick of companies telling me what I can do with the stuff I paid good money for. If I have paid for it and brought it home, then I'll do whatever the hell I want to do with it and the company can stuff itself if it thinks otherwise.

The fact remains that Vista is supposed to be a product for consumers and for consumers to buy it they should have to want it and like it. A fair chunk of people using it though did not particularly want it and neither do they like it. 

Let me ask you this, if Vauxhall or Audi told you to buy a new car because they said it was better and they were going to stop servicing your current one would you buy it?

NO!

Firstly, I have to give at least one credit to all those Vista Fanbois out there who hail Vista as an "Evolution" or an "Upgrade" or "A Step Forward" or whatever... one credit for their blind, foolish and unknowing loyalty towards Microsoft.

As people sometimes say, why bother fix something that is not broken? Windows XP works brilliantly... and unlike Windows Vista, it doesn't require a "Cray X1 Supercomputer"-Wannabe to run.

Just think for a number of minutes; just what is an Operating System supposed to do? Is it supposed to report home whenever it deems fit? Is it supposed to intentionally degrade performance to force unnecessary spending on unnecessary upgrades? Is it supposed to be bloated with endless useless features which do nothing but hog up resources?

An Operating System is supposed to be a framework in which I can do my daily tasks on my computer, without unnecessarily spending the hardware resources which I have invested in. I should be able to decide on my computer where I want my resources going. I should be able to decide on my computer what kind of remote connection gets initiated and when and I should have the right to accept or deny it.

So... not only is Vista a complete waste of time and resources... Vista has got absolutely no "Wow-Factor" to it (and no, Aero doesn't count as one). Vista did not offer what consumers wanted. Vista did not live up to any of its expectations.

If the additional resources Vista wasted were actually meaningful, then yes, upgrading would be logical. But why would I want to upgrade my system just to process the monumental amount of DRM contained within Vista? Some day someone should come up with a DRMPU.

Don't talk to me about "Evolution" without giving yourself a "Reality Check" first. I've been using Windows since the days of Windows NT 3.51 ... and so far, every single new Windows version has been a big "Wow" for me, with the exception of Windows ME and Windows Vista.

Windows NT4/95 finally gave a more intuitive interface for users.

Windows 98 made it possible to use a PC with that little bit less of IT Knowledge (much better Plug and Play support, which actually worked).

Windows 2000 cleaned up Windows NT4 and was actually a workstation OS which had the potential of being used outside of a large enterprise. And it included Active Directory.

Windows XP took compatibility of Windows 2000 to an all-new-level for the everyday PC at home, while retaining Windows 2000’s stability.

Windows Vista? All Microsoft accomplished with this was they have proven that it's possible to build an Operating System with DRM as the foundation of it.

Again... Vista Fanbois... Reality Check.

A smart person knew that Microsoft always throw the draft operating system to Lab Rats (clients) who grab VISTA early and scream because of problems. They just experiment on you as dummy but this system cost $300! That's why I stand with XP until they fix it straight out their mess to meet the money worth. Psst, it occur to Windows XP and now it is much improvement than early version because of service packs. But my question is does they keep their promise to fix the bugs? Also it's depend on the serious problem that they focus on most. some problem are minor, they will hold and ignore.

This is how I see it, correct me if I’m wrong. bare with me, this is an exercise in over-analyzing.

What do businesses do? They sell stuff for profit, and this relies on demand. Let’s say business M releases operating system P (or in this case, XP). A few years after the release of operating system P -- and 95% of everyone now owning this product -- this business will not be making as much profit as it did when it was initially released. Why? Product P does not physically age. Obviously, software (the source of its data; a CD/DVD – and thus, the data itself) does not have the flaws that a purely physical product does; that is, being worn down by elements in the environment – unless of course you’re thinking of environmental extremes or time-scales in the hundreds, if not thousands of years. 

Sure, for an inexperienced user who carelessly floods their operating system with crap from the internet, never defrags, or cleans the registry, they will eventually end up with a less than stable and/or slow operating system. This issue can ultimately be remedied by formatting and re-installing fresh from the disc in which it originated-- which, although a physical product, should be in the same condition as when it was purchased, assuming it was stored safely and not used as a coaster. You do not have to necessarily re-purchase the program.

A car manufacturer, on the other hand, is confident that as a car ages, it will either have to be repaired or replaced. If a car could indefinitely retain its new condition, or be returned to it simply by “re-installing” its physical manifestation, sales would plummet – even considering those who are still willing to buy a new car for the sake of having something different – and the industry would likely be driven by only a handful of companies. In a scenario like this, an equally careless/inexperienced person -- in relation to an operating system user – could return the engine, paint, etc. to new condition by simply popping a disk into the CD player, playing track 5, and while the car sits in the garage as the owner eats dinner, the vehicle returns to its car lot condition as when it was purchased.

Ok, assuming cars were able to retain their indefinitely new condition like data in software – or rejuvenated via re-install -- what about flaw fixes or enhanced capabilities? If you want a car with wheels that do not occasionally fall off – causing crashes that lead to large blue bruises (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbj8kMvQDfI) -- you’d have to patch it up with more reliable lug nuts – if they exist. 

But, as it is said, if you want a new engine (or not) that does not fit under the hood, you will not be able to stick with the same chassis. Couldn’t the hood just be modified to allow for a bigger engine? Apparently when the car hood is an operating system like XP, the answer is no. But I’m not a software designer; I could not say whether or not many features in Vista could have been turned into optional upgrades for XP. There are, apparently, only so many upgrades (patches/service packs) one can rely upon before there is nothing else to improve/fix. This is an obvious problem for a profit seeking business, such as say, Microsoft.

Perhaps the unspoken but implied message they are sending goes as follows: Do you have Windows XP and want enhanced security, DX10, and the lot? Well, you’re gonna have to get Windows Vista. Wait, what’s that you say? ‘No, XP is working great’, you don’t want it? Oh well, even though you see Vista as nothing more than a polished, but malfunctioning and unfinished concept car prototype that has poor – if not non-existent – aftermarket auto-part compatibility, as well as horrible fuel efficiency-- you’re gonna have to take it anyway. 

What else? You do not need a car with transparent paint, locks that use foot-long keys, or a Dynamic eXtreme, 10 cylinder engine, capable of displacing 768 cu. In. with a power (SAE net) of 900 BHP – dual implosion cylinders effective at 1800 BHP? You do not need a retractable radio antenna/umbrella; a windshield capable of projecting a holographic virtual chess board; seats with funny sound effects; a ceiling-deployable, 360 degree, halo air-conditioning system – capable of cooling your hot head from every angle in steamy, summer, lunch-time traffic? What about the included –and difficult, if not impossible, to detach – hauling-trailer filled with all sorts of goodies that you may someday—but most likely will never – use? Too bad, this car has no options.

Even though you are satisfied with your older, but more optimized, fuel efficient, and indefinitely new Honda civic, many of these new features, we have decided, you must have. And unfortunately, as we have concluded, we cannot -- or will not -- develop an upgrade to give those of you happy with your old, but indefinitely new, Honda civic an option to install. We are not satisfied with releasing patches and service packs – even if we started charging a fee for them. We need to sell you something. We need to keep our name in circulation. We need to keep making huge a profit. And we’re going to force you to accept this by forcing car dealerships to sell it. All your wallets are now belong to us.

The point is, when profits start to wane, a new product must be released, and the consumer is going to have to buy it, whether they need it or not.

Did I mention this workstation is also a server, a development rig, doing continuous HPC calculations, and maintaining a 100GB database? And then I check e-mail, browse the web, use Office etc. on top of that.

XP is industrial strength! OK, perhaps not quite, but this is pretty sweet stability.