Windows Vista SP1 Beta - Mid July
Posted by lardiop on 09 July 2007 - 00:33 · 112 comments & 53069 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name:
lardiop
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name:
lardiopContact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(1 reply)
#1 Posted by SkyyPunk on 09 Jul 2007 - 00:37
- :spaz dance:
guess thats good news they are uppin the schedule!
-
(7 replies)
#3 Posted by naap51stang on 09 Jul 2007 - 00:44
- Beta is fine, but would you install this on a production unit?
Does anyone else think that MS is like the left hand not knowing what the right
hand is doing? One side says no SP til winter, then another side says beta by mid
July. -
#3.1 Posted by PaulRD on 09 Jul 2007 - 00:46
- Well the estimated release of the finished SP might not be until the winter, where as, the beta might start in mid July.
-
#3.2 Posted by SharpGreen on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:17
- I would. I have installed beta SPs on production boxes with no problem.
-
#3.3 Posted by GP007 on 09 Jul 2007 - 14:58
- They've always beta'd SPs before. Just like everything else, you'll have to sign up for the beta test and so on. Or maybe they'll just pick you outta some past beta you've been in.
-
#3.4 Posted by +Octol on 10 Jul 2007 - 02:13
- Quote -Beta is fine, but would you install this on a production unit?
No, but I'd put it on my girlfriend's computer! Hey, she doesn't have anything important to lose, so why not!
-
#3.5 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:20
- beta is beta. i am not stupid so would not install it on my production machine.
MS is MS, and always will be MS, they never give releiable release info about any of this ssort of stuff. it is not about one part not having any idea of the other, it is MS not wanting everyone knowing what is going on, and creating speculation is good for them -
#3.6 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:22
- Quote - (SharpGreen said @ #3.2)I would. I have installed beta SPs on production boxes with no problem.
first question, are you an IT guy?
second question, woudl these production machines be in a corporate environment
third question, if answer to second questino is yes, were you fired?
if answer to second question is no, then i assume it was your own PC? -
#3.7 Posted by sphbecker on 10 Jul 2007 - 21:08
- Quote - (naap51stang said @ #3)Beta is fine, but would you install this on a production unit?
Does anyone else think that MS is like the left hand not knowing what the right
hand is doing? One side says no SP til winter, then another side says beta by mid
July.
Um no? If SP1 is to be realized around winter then don't you expect the Beta to be around this time? The only problem are the fragmented news releases where it takes a week to get the full story, but that is to be expected from the rumor mill.
-
(5 replies)
#4 Posted by thollian on 09 Jul 2007 - 00:45
- if true, sounds good to me...just hope they don't rush it...
-
#4.1 Posted by excalpius on 09 Jul 2007 - 02:00
- I think past experience would indicate that they will.
-
#4.2 Posted by cork1958 on 09 Jul 2007 - 11:17
- There is no doubt about that they will rush it. Just as they "rushed" Vista as a whole. Although it was delayed several times, they should've delayed it A LOT longer. Personally, Vista is no better than Windows Me was to 98SE, a total POS!
Had it on 2 of my machines for 2 days. That was all it took to realize XP Pro, is still the way to go!! -
#4.3 Posted by ColdBlue on 09 Jul 2007 - 13:04
- Quote - (cork1958 said @ #4.2)There is no doubt about that they will rush it. Just as they "rushed" Vista as a whole. Although it was delayed several times, they should've delayed it A LOT longer. Personally, Vista is no better than Windows Me was to 98SE, a total POS!
Had it on 2 of my machines for 2 days. That was all it took to realize XP Pro, is still the way to go!!
-
#4.4 Posted by ahhell on 09 Jul 2007 - 13:07
- Quote - (cork1958 said @ #4.2)There is no doubt about that they will rush it. Just as they "rushed" Vista as a whole. Although it was delayed several times, they should've delayed it A LOT longer. Personally, Vista is no better than Windows Me was to 98SE, a total POS!
Had it on 2 of my machines for 2 days. That was all it took to realize XP Pro, is still the way to go!!
Yeah, you can get a good feel for Vista in 2 days.
-
#5 Posted by sCrAtCh420th on 09 Jul 2007 - 00:46
- maybe the side saying winter is the final side
-
(3 replies)
#6 Posted by +Lexcyn on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:00
- I wonder how we can slipstream service packs into the Vista install DVD? That will be interesting! *goes to search MSDN*
-
#6.1 Posted by Express on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:42
- Look up WAIK.
Michael Kleef has posted some pretty cool video tutorials that will give you a primer on the tools. -
#6.2 Posted by GP007 on 09 Jul 2007 - 15:00
- Doesn't Vista have a slipstreem tool that comes with it? I sorta remember something about a easy to use tool/app that would do all that for you now.
-
#6.3 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:23
- Quote - (Express said @ #6.1)Look up WAIK.
Michael Kleef has posted some pretty cool video tutorials that will give you a primer on the tools.
LMAO
i know him.
-
(9 replies)
#7 Posted by RAID 0 on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:15
- You know what I think.. after this SP1 is released, (not the beta) EVERY ONE OF YOU who said they're going Vista AFTER SP1 better put your money where your mouth is. That's all I'm waiting for. For self amusement, nothing more. :-)
-
#7.1 Posted by excalpius on 09 Jul 2007 - 02:02
- Just because MS is calling it SP1, doesn't mean the entire IT industry will buy off on that designation as stable and deployable. If it turns out MS is just rushing this out to sell more copies of Vista to people who are "waiting for SP1", then we'll find the problems when we kick the tires and wait until SP2 to deploy Vista.
-
#7.2 Posted by RAID 0 on 09 Jul 2007 - 04:48
- Quote - (excalpius said @ #7.1)Just because MS is calling it SP1, doesn't mean the entire IT industry will buy off on that designation as stable and deployable. If it turns out MS is just rushing this out to sell more copies of Vista to people who are "waiting for SP1", then we'll find the problems when we kick the tires and wait until SP2 to deploy Vista.
YES! BUT! How many people on Neowin and other tech sites were saying.. "I'm waiting for SP1"????? -
#7.3 Posted by excalpius on 09 Jul 2007 - 05:10
- They were making the assumption that Vista SP1 would be to the same level of polish that XP SP1 was. And if they are beta testing it less than six months from release, I am dubious. We shall see.
-
#7.4 Posted by kaiwai on 09 Jul 2007 - 05:41
- Quote - (RAID 0 said @ #7)You know what I think.. after this SP1 is released, (not the beta) EVERY ONE OF YOU who said they're going Vista AFTER SP1 better put your money where your mouth is. That's all I'm waiting for. For self amusement, nothing more. :-)
Well, I'm running Windows Vista Business right now (which came with my laptop) and it is awesome; but I think the issue isn't so much drivers these days but applications which are taking advantage of the technology 'under the hood' which Microsoft has made available in Windows Vista.
Hopefully by next year there will be applications using the cool new things after Microsoft releases new developer tools for Windows Vista. -
#7.5 Posted by RAID 0 on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:42
- Quote - (kaiwai said @ #7.4)Quote - (RAID 0 said @ #7)You know what I think.. after this SP1 is released, (not the beta) EVERY ONE OF YOU who said they're going Vista AFTER SP1 better put your money where your mouth is. That's all I'm waiting for. For self amusement, nothing more. :-)
Well, I'm running Windows Vista Business right now (which came with my laptop) and it is awesome; but I think the issue isn't so much drivers these days but applications which are taking advantage of the technology 'under the hood' which Microsoft has made available in Windows Vista.
Hopefully by next year there will be applications using the cool new things after Microsoft releases new developer tools for Windows Vista.
Oh for sure. I look back to the days of the Windows 95 release... how long did it take the devs to create 32 bit apps? It's gonna take time no doubt. -
#7.6 Posted by GP007 on 09 Jul 2007 - 15:06
- Quote - (excalpius said @ #7.3)They were making the assumption that Vista SP1 would be to the same level of polish that XP SP1 was. And if they are beta testing it less than six months from release, I am dubious. We shall see.
I think the level will be higher actually. Beta testing it for 6months is fine imo, the thing is that all of this is already being beta tested by the windows server 2k8 teams. You have to remember that the code is the same now, if they find a bug and fix it in 2k8, it applys to Vista and so forth, unless we're talking only the Server side bits that don't ship with Vista.
Either way, the new way of doing things means that any advantage in performence/stability in the Server version now will also find its way to the client.
I know many who run Win2k3 as their desktop OS over XP. People have been going on and on about how good/great XP is, but before we had all this vista talk, people who rave about how great 2k3 is over XP. -
#7.7 Posted by +Octol on 10 Jul 2007 - 02:31
- Quote - (RAID 0 said @ #7.2)YES! BUT! How many people on Neowin and other tech sites were saying.. "I'm waiting for SP1"?????
Plenty – and Microsoft knows it! If I were a suspicious kind of guy, I'd definitely be suspicious of this apparent rush job.
Frankly, I'm one of those people that believes that Vista RTM wasn't nearly finished when it was released. And while Vista has some truly awesome features (like its networking), I can't really say that I like it yet. It's just too alien for someone like me who is used to being able to do pretty much whatever I want without having to jump through a lot of unnecessary (for me) hoops. I guess there ought to be a Competent User Edition of Vista.
Oh wait! There is one! It's called Windows Server 2008! -
#7.8 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:30
- Quote - (RAID 0 said @ #7)You know what I think.. after this SP1 is released, (not the beta) EVERY ONE OF YOU who said they're going Vista AFTER SP1 better put your money where your mouth is. That's all I'm waiting for. For self amusement, nothing more. :-)
This comment is out of perspecctive and i don't think you really understand the IT industry, when people say i will wait till SP1, they usually mean wait until then to test it, i.e. they will start to test it and see if it will fit into their environment once SP1 comes out, if it does then they will move, if it doesn't they will keep waiting (if it aint broke), they do not mean, as soon as SP1 is released i am going to go install vista on all my production machines.
I have said it many times, if SP1 is a failure Vista will be a failure, IT guys will not deploy vista with sp1 unless they think it is ogoing to be a stable environment.
IT guys will put their money behind vista when they know they are not goign to get constant support calls on it. -
#7.9 Posted by RAID 0 on 14 Jul 2007 - 02:05
- Quote - (whocares78 said @ #7.
Quote - (RAID 0 said @ #7)You know what I think.. after this SP1 is released, (not the beta) EVERY ONE OF YOU who said they're going Vista AFTER SP1 better put your money where your mouth is. That's all I'm waiting for. For self amusement, nothing more. :-)
This comment is out of perspecctive and i don't think you really understand the IT industry, when people say i will wait till SP1, they usually mean wait until then to test it, i.e. they will start to test it and see if it will fit into their environment once SP1 comes out, if it does then they will move, if it doesn't they will keep waiting (if it aint broke), they do not mean, as soon as SP1 is released i am going to go install vista on all my production machines.
I have said it many times, if SP1 is a failure Vista will be a failure, IT guys will not deploy vista with sp1 unless they think it is ogoing to be a stable environment.
IT guys will put their money behind vista when they know they are not goign to get constant support calls on it.
So.. just to get this right.. I don't understand the IT industry.. but you know what everyone was/is talking about when they said "I'm waiting for SP1"??????? interesting. I wish I knew as much as you did. Being able to read minds is a great ability to have.
-
(6 replies)
#8 Posted by Orlando on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:17
- I hope SP1 will solve my PPPoE connection problem.
-
#8.1 Posted by kaiwai on 10 Jul 2007 - 00:05
- Quote - (Orlando said @ #I hope SP1 will solve my PPPoE connection problem.
Damn, there are companies who use PPPoE? *shudder* give me adsl anyday of the week. -
#8.2 Posted by +Octol on 10 Jul 2007 - 02:35
- Quote - (kaiwai said @ #8.1)Damn, there are companies who use PPPoE? *shudder* give me adsl anyday of the week.
You've got me confused. The encapsulation on my ADSL connection is PPPoE (used to be PPPoA until my ISP changed over to the faster protocol).
Are we all talking about the same thing? -
#8.3 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:35
- LMAO you may want to read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-to-Poin...l_over_Ethernet
it's pretty much standard for ADSL -
#8.4 Posted by kaiwai on 10 Jul 2007 - 11:16
- Quote - (whocares78 said @ #8.3)LMAO you may want to read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-to-Poin...l_over_Ethernet
it's pretty much standard for ADSL
Mate, have you heard of a thing called a ROUTER which you connect to your NETWORK card - you know, so then your operating system should have nothing to do with needing to setup PPPoE on the client computer.
btw, my ISP, Xtra, uses PPPoA - setup the the router, and everything else is a non-issue; heck, I can hook up anydamn computer running any damn operating system, its all good.
Maybe the person complaining about PPPoE should invest in an ADSL router instead of using a scody PPPoE client. -
#8.5 Posted by whocares78 on 11 Jul 2007 - 00:51
- Quote - (kaiwai said @ #8.4)Quote - (whocares78 said @ #8.3)LMAO you may want to read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-to-Poin...l_over_Ethernet
it's pretty much standard for ADSL
Mate, have you heard of a thing called a ROUTER which you connect to your NETWORK card - you know, so then your operating system should have nothing to do with needing to setup PPPoE on the client computer.
btw, my ISP, Xtra, uses PPPoA - setup the the router, and everything else is a non-issue; heck, I can hook up anydamn computer running any damn operating system, its all good.
Maybe the person complaining about PPPoE should invest in an ADSL router instead of using a scody PPPoE client.
umm yes and that is what almost every singleADSL conection uses, even mine, my ADSL ROUTER uses pppoe so why you are saying adsl desn't use ppoe is just crazy. i do agree it has nothign to do with your PC if you usea router. the point was you said give me adsl any day of the week, my point was all adsl pretty much uses pppoe, whther it is through a ppoe client or a router. read the damn article. -
#8.6 Posted by Kyanar on 13 Jul 2007 - 02:28
- Quote - (kaiwai said @ #8.4)Ah, but being Xtra you likely have more downtime than the folks with the "scody PPPoE client"Quote - (whocares78 said @ #8.3)LMAO you may want to read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-to-Poin...l_over_Ethernet
it's pretty much standard for ADSL
Mate, have you heard of a thing called a ROUTER which you connect to your NETWORK card - you know, so then your operating system should have nothing to do with needing to setup PPPoE on the client computer.
btw, my ISP, Xtra, uses PPPoA - setup the the router, and everything else is a non-issue; heck, I can hook up anydamn computer running any damn operating system, its all good.
Maybe the person complaining about PPPoE should invest in an ADSL router instead of using a scody PPPoE client.
Remember: "There are no known problems with the Xtra network"
-
(4 replies)
#9 Posted by +lylesback2 on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:31
- i guess they are desperate to solve those problems, and finally get people to swing over to Vista asap.
-
#9.1 Posted by M118LR on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:57
- Desperate ?
Vista went RTM 8 Nov. 2006. By the time SP1 goes RTM, Vista will be 1 year old, a normal time frame. Also remember Vista SP1 is being developed at the same time as Server 2008. So when SP2 comes out, there will be Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2 released together. -
#9.2 Posted by GP007 on 09 Jul 2007 - 15:07
- Quote - (M118LR said @ #9.1)Desperate ?
Vista went RTM 8 Nov. 2006. By the time SP1 goes RTM, Vista will be 1 year old, a normal time frame. Also remember Vista SP1 is being developed at the same time as Server 2008. So when SP2 comes out, there will be Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2 released together.
You mean Server SP1 and Vista SP2. Remember Server RTM = Vista SP1, code wise. -
#9.3 Posted by M118LR on 09 Jul 2007 - 18:48
- No I meant what I said. Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2.
This is already the case with Server 2003 SP2 and XP64 SP2. As XP64 started at the Server 2003 SP1 level, there was not an SP1 for XP64.
Vista SP1 and Server 2008 RTM will be at the same level as well. So when SP2 comes out, it will be Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2. -
#9.4 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:37
- Quote - (M118LR said @ #9.3)No I meant what I said. Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2.
This is already the case with Server 2003 SP2 and XP64 SP2. As XP64 started at the Server 2003 SP1 level, there was not an SP1 for XP64.
Vista SP1 and Server 2008 RTM will be at the same level as well. So when SP2 comes out, it will be Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2.
this is bloody confusing can we wait till sp1 is released adn also till 2009 server is released before we start talkign about sp2's
-
(1 reply)
#10 Posted by powerlifter450 on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:38
- I wonder what kind of new anti piracy protections are being introduced in sp1. Theres been alot of talk of even stronger protectins being introduced through the service packs.
-
(4 replies)
#11 Posted by EduardValencia on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:42
- great,that will shut up some kids,that moan and moan about vista
-
#11.2 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:38
- it will only shut them up if it fixes all the problems
-
#11.3 Posted by J_R_G on 11 Jul 2007 - 03:23
- Quote - (EduardValencia said @ #11)great,that will shut up some kids,that moan and moan about vista
You must be new here. It's like this, you say "I never use an OS before SP1" after RTM, when SP1 ships, you switch to "I never use an OS before SP2" nobody will know the difference, and you'll be looked upon as sexy and cool for being an OS rebel. Thank me later. -
#11.4 Posted by EduardValencia on 12 Jul 2007 - 21:16
- Pardon??!! lolll?
- First I'm not a OS Rebel
- I'm not new
- I say it the way i want
- It's true what i said
- And NO,i don't have nothing to thank you
-
(2 replies)
#13 Posted by MioTheGreat on 09 Jul 2007 - 01:59
- We don't need them to rush it...
-
#13.2 Posted by GP007 on 09 Jul 2007 - 15:11
- It's not being rushed. People seem to think it is, but because (and this has been said many times), Vista and Server 2k8 are on the same code base, all the testing and fixes that Server 2k8 has been going through also apply to Vista SP1. The 6 or so months of direct Vista SP1 testing should be enough imo, though only time will tell.
-
(9 replies)
#14 Posted by Primetime2006 on 09 Jul 2007 - 02:06
- Oh great, here we go again.
SP1 delayed - everyone says screw you MS, you said SP1 would be out by the end of 2007, damn you, I hate you, I will never use your products again.
SP1 back on track - screw you MS, you are going to release it before it's ready. blah blah blah blah (insert usual whining here).
They have been working on SP1 a long time right now and quite frankly they originally did say SP1 would be out by the end of 2007, so I was shocked when they said they were going to delay it. So this news really isn't news, it's just that confirming the old news was really the right news (confusing). I'm glad it's being released because I was waiting for this to go to Vista and quite frankly, I will be happy that they are updating the kernel to match Longhorn Server, not to mention everything else.
In any event, I love how the same people complaining about the delay are now complaining about a so called "rush in release" which isn't the case if you had bothered to follow the timeline. Such hypocrites. -
#14.1 Posted by excalpius on 09 Jul 2007 - 05:14
- They rushes Vista 2 after Vista 1 was scrapped, so yeah, call us all a bit skeptical. My guess is that Vista SP1 will be the equivalent of XP at RELEASE time and we'll have to wait for Vista SP2 to see wide scale deployments. Hopefully I will be wrong, but...
-
#14.2 Posted by JonathanMarston on 09 Jul 2007 - 05:36
- Quote - (Primetime2006 said @ #14)They have been working on SP1 a long time right now and quite frankly they originally did say SP1 would be out by the end of 2007, so I was shocked when they said they were going to delay it.
Maybe I missed it, but did they ever really announce a delay? All I remember reading is that they promised a beta "by the end of the year," others made speculations that it would be delayed until winter 2008 based on that. They were probably just giving themselves ample wiggle room with the DoJ in case they ran into problems and couldn't produce SP1 on schedule, all the while still planning on having SP1 final out be the end of the year.
Anyways, whenever SP1 comes out, it'll be a good thing. I've been hearing nothing but good about Server 2008, and Vista's getting the same kernel in SP1. The driver issues (with newer hardware, anyway) should be taken care of by then, and most developers have already released either a new Vista-compatible version of their software, or patches to make their existing products work with Vista.
By the end of the year, I doubt that most people will have any valid reason not to upgrade to Vista, other than possibly the cost of Vista itself and/or cost of hardware upgrades. Now whether or not they'll have a reason to upgrade remains to be seen...
Last edited by JonathanMarston on 09 Jul 2007 - 05:42 -
#14.3 Posted by kaiwai on 09 Jul 2007 - 05:51
- Quote - (excalpius said @ #14.1)They rushes Vista 2 after Vista 1 was scrapped, so yeah, call us all a bit skeptical. My guess is that Vista SP1 will be the equivalent of XP at RELEASE time and we'll have to wait for Vista SP2 to see wide scale deployments. Hopefully I will be wrong, but...
Rushed?! What the hell are you smoking?
Windows Vista was moved from Windows XP to Windows 2003 SP1 base - how is that a 'rush'? maybe if they were cmopletely and utterly diffferent platforms, then sure, but they're not.
As for the issue at hand, SP1 has been in development for some time already - delays? absolutely NOTHING to do with product quality and everything to do with waiting for DOJ to make sure that all the changes required, are being made.
If people want a company or individual to lynch, then look at Google whining over crap like 'desktop search' - it has moved from being a semi-reasonable assurance for equal access to OEM by competing operating systems to complete bull**** demanding security features to be removed as to allow the likes of Symantec and McAfee to royally f*ck around with the system internals.
Sorry, quite frankly, if Microsoft competitors can't compete without butchering the operating system, then maybe they should close up shop, sell off the assets and find a damn hole to hide in. -
#14.4 Posted by excalpius on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:50
- Kaiwai, blaming DOJ for this is ridiculous. I for one am looking forward to having ANY other desktop search option for Vista. OR I'd like MS to give us the kind of control over the Desktop Search Service that keeps it from interfering with games, etc. IT NEVER STOPS. Even when playing a full screen game, Windows Desktop Search is off banging the hard drive and taking up CPU (although less that when it is running all alone). I have to DISABLE the damn service to play any game with a solid frame rate. How retarded is that? How hard is it to have a PAUSE INDEXING button or just PAUSE when any full screen application is running, or if the CPU is running high? Honestly?!
So, if google's desktop search can be integrated and works in a more user-friendly fashion, I'd love to use it. -
#14.5 Posted by NightmarE D on 09 Jul 2007 - 08:07
- Quote - (excalpius said @ #14.4)Kaiwai, blaming DOJ for this is ridiculous. I for one am looking forward to having ANY other desktop search option for Vista. OR I'd like MS to give us the kind of control over the Desktop Search Service that keeps it from interfering with games, etc. IT NEVER STOPS. Even when playing a full screen game, Windows Desktop Search is off banging the hard drive and taking up CPU (although less that when it is running all alone). I have to DISABLE the damn service to play any game with a solid frame rate. How retarded is that? How hard is it to have a PAUSE INDEXING button or just PAUSE when any full screen application is running, or if the CPU is running high? Honestly?!
So, if google's desktop search can be integrated and works in a more user-friendly fashion, I'd love to use it.
Once you end the indexing service it's always off unless you turn it back on. I don't think you even know what you're talking about. I've never had the indexing service slow any game down when I was running Vista. If you're computer is that bad at indexing it must be pretty slow. There's also no reason your system should be constantly indexing like you make it sound like it does. On a fresh install I let it sit for about 20 minutes and it had everything indexed.
Sounds to me like you just turned it off for the duration of the time you played a game. You have to put it on DISABLED in the drop down menu or else it will just start back up the next time you restart. I think you just don't know what you're doing and it looks to me that you're only in here to bash Vista if I were to judge by your other posts in here. -
#14.6 Posted by Esvandiary on 09 Jul 2007 - 11:09
- Quote - (kaiwai said @ #14.3)Rushed?! What the hell are you smoking?
Windows Vista was moved from Windows XP to Windows 2003 SP1 base - how is that a 'rush'? maybe if they were cmopletely and utterly diffferent platforms, then sure, but they're not.
If he means what I think he means, I completely agree (but then imo Longhorn 4xxx was unfairly scrapped). Vista needed a few more revs in the beta stages to iron out some of the bugs and give the devs more time to add features, polish etc (e.g. the sidebar - who the hell decided to use DHTML/JS instead of .NET interop there?)
It's a valid point, you just failed to understand it. -
#14.7 Posted by kaiwai on 10 Jul 2007 - 00:10
- Quote - (Esvandiary said @ #14.6)Quote - (kaiwai said @ #14.3)Rushed?! What the hell are you smoking?
Windows Vista was moved from Windows XP to Windows 2003 SP1 base - how is that a 'rush'? maybe if they were cmopletely and utterly diffferent platforms, then sure, but they're not.
If he means what I think he means, I completely agree (but then imo Longhorn 4xxx was unfairly scrapped). Vista needed a few more revs in the beta stages to iron out some of the bugs and give the devs more time to add features, polish etc (e.g. the sidebar - who the hell decided to use DHTML/JS instead of .NET interop there?)
It's a valid point, you just failed to understand it.
It was scrapped for reasons that go far beyond what we know about. They probably looked at it, realised that future developments they wanted to do wouldn't stand up to the requirements for future development.
For me, if I was developing Vista, I would have grabbed the OpenSolaris core, and build a sexy gui ontop; a insanely scalable and stable operating system with a sexy front end.
With that being said, Windows Vista as delivered right now, is great. Its definately less buggy than when Windows XP or Windows 2000 was released; the need to wait out of Sp1 was little more than Microsoft bashing than anything to do with reality. -
#14.8 Posted by whocares78 on 10 Jul 2007 - 03:44
- Quote - (NightmarE D said @ #14.5)On a fresh install I let it sit for about 20 minutes and it had everything indexed.
LMAO did you have any data on your PC, i.e word docs PDF's, on a clean install i would assume no, everythign i have heard it takes days to index the average conmputer, and 20 minutes to index a clean install is ridiculous, what the hell is it indexing. operating system files???? -
#14.9 Posted by whocares78 on 11 Jul 2007 - 00:55
- Quote - (kaiwai said @ #14.7)Quote - (Esvandiary said @ #14.6)Quote - (kaiwai said @ #14.3)Rushed?! What the hell are you smoking?
Windows Vista was moved from Windows XP to Windows 2003 SP1 base - how is that a 'rush'? maybe if they were cmopletely and utterly diffferent platforms, then sure, but they're not.
If he means what I think he means, I completely agree (but then imo Longhorn 4xxx was unfairly scrapped). Vista needed a few more revs in the beta stages to iron out some of the bugs and give the devs more time to add features, polish etc (e.g. the sidebar - who the hell decided to use DHTML/JS instead of .NET interop there?)
It's a valid point, you just failed to understand it.
It was scrapped for reasons that go far beyond what we know about. They probably looked at it, realised that future developments they wanted to do wouldn't stand up to the requirements for future development.
For me, if I was developing Vista, I would have grabbed the OpenSolaris core, and build a sexy gui ontop; a insanely scalable and stable operating system with a sexy front end.
With that being said, Windows Vista as delivered right now, is great. Its definately less buggy than when Windows XP or Windows 2000 was released; the need to wait out of Sp1 was little more than Microsoft bashing than anything to do with reality.
are you insane, vista is about as stable as my ass after a hot curry!!!!
and your comment on building windows on opensolaris core, is just funny, thisis MS we're talking about
-
(1 reply)
#15 Posted by signalpirate on 09 Jul 2007 - 02:59
- hey guys ... has anyone received any beta emails ??? i was on the vista beta team ... haven't heard of anything yet .... weird
-
#15.1 Posted by NightmarE D on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:16
- Nothing weird about it. They haven't actually announced anything official yet about this service pack and when the beta of it does come out I'm thinking they'll make it a public beta so they can get a big number of people to test it.
All just my opinion though.
-
#16 Posted by MtDewCodeRedFreak on 09 Jul 2007 - 03:37
- Interesting, indeed.
Can't wait!
-
(1 reply)
#17 Posted by Croquant on 09 Jul 2007 - 04:21
- Look for the Vista SP1 to be ready around November, then.
-
#17.1 Posted by NightmarE D on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:17
- You mean like it says in the above article?Quote -And despite what Microsoft seemingly led Google, the U.S. Department of Justice and other company watchers to believe, the final version of Vista SP1 is sounding like November 2007.
Last edited by NightmarE D on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:46
-
#18 Posted by J a d o O n on 09 Jul 2007 - 04:28
- Its leaked information, Microsoft havnt announced anything yet... but its interesting
http://technobuddy.blogspot.com
-
#19 Posted by obsolete_power on 09 Jul 2007 - 05:30
- Oh man if this is true, i might actually consider going back to my copy of Vista Ultimate.
-
#20 Posted by Loxx on 09 Jul 2007 - 06:07
- ah well should roll up those 200 odd .msu files they're yet to publish on microsoft update
-
(2 replies)
#21 Posted by statm1 on 09 Jul 2007 - 06:08
- Wonderful another round of whiners.
-
#21.1 Posted by MvT Cracker on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:33
- Quote - (statm1 said @ #21)Wonderful another round of whiners.
I agree I have been a vista fan since beta 2 infact I would not mind running my system on rc1
vista is fine with standard software and standard hardware (properly installed not overclocked)
-
(6 replies)
#22 Posted by NightmarE D on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:44
- Here's what's funny about this. And this happens every single time too.
What was it, like a month or 2 after it hit the store shelves there were PC's found that were running test versions of SP1 for Vista? As seen by those screenshots someone captured of a PC at some Microsoft event. So sometime around March, maybe even April?
Vista went RTM in November of 2006. People were very quick to start whining about a service pack to fix all the bugs. It's now July, 2007 and there's news about a possible BETA of a service pack starting in the next couple weeks. Vista has been done for what, 7 months now? 7 months from release there's talks of a service pack BETA with a possible final version in November of 2007 and some people want to say that they rushed it?
That's one whole year to build and test a service pack. More than enough time and a year from release is a normal time for releasing a service pack. They didn't rush it and they didn't take forever with it either. Late 2007, early 2008 was always the timeline for a Vista service pack from everything I've ever read about it. So that part isn't even news really.
There's these people out there that always find a way to complain about something. It's like they're not happy unless they constantly complain.
Whine because they're too slow and whine because they're too fast. The people that whine about Vista need to find a new hobby.
On a side note: I'm waiting for this to appear on Paul Thurrotts site. He'll say "my inside sources have told me..." inside sources being he read Mary Jo's blog and will try making it look like he knew before anyone else. I bet he's very irritated right now not being the first person to say anything about this and I'm thrilled about that
-
#22.2 Posted by NightmarE D on 09 Jul 2007 - 07:56
- Quote - (excalpius said @ #22.1)Or, whine about whiners.
First time I've ever talked about the subject actually and if you want to keep trolling with your little remarks like this one here and the one above I'll gladly report you to a mod. Seeing how your post above "look in a mirror lately?" can be considered a personal attack towards statm1.
My post was far from whining. Just pointing out how stupid people have been acting over this. -
#22.3 Posted by excalpius on 09 Jul 2007 - 10:01
- Dude it sounded as whiney (about BOTH sides) as any of the posts above...in other words, I didn't find either of them whiney, but I thought it was relevant to post how people seem to be whining about, well, people whining.
And, while you are at it, stop whining. -
#22.4 Posted by statm1 on 09 Jul 2007 - 17:40
- Quote - (excalpius said @ #22.3)Dude it sounded as whiney (about BOTH sides) as any of the posts above...in other words, I didn't find either of them whiney, but I thought it was relevant to post how people seem to be whining about, well, people whining.
And, while you are at it, stop whining.
Well if you really want to go the immature route. Your whining about whining about the whiners.. Wow. Your doing your job well Excal.. -
#22.5 Posted by statm1 on 09 Jul 2007 - 17:43
- I totally agree Nightmare. I didnt think your post was supposed to be considered whining at all.
I just meant that the amount of posts about people complaining about Vista had started to taper down and now with news of a SP starting up. It will start going back up again. Thats really all I meant.
"Just when Microsoft had customers, partners and competitors all believing that it was going to delay the first service pack for Vista - not releasing a first beta of it until just before year-end - the company is set to deliver Beta 1 of Vista SP1 in mid-July.
Word (from various sources who asked not to be named) is Microsoft is gearing up to drop Vista SP1 some time the week of July 16. And despite what Microsoft seemingly led Google, the U.S. Department of Justice and other company watchers to believe, the final version of Vista SP1 is sounding like November 2007."