Announcing Service Pack 1 for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2


Recommended Posts

Today, Microsoft is announcing Service Pack 1 (SP1) for Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows 7. Detailed information regarding SP1 will be released over the next several months; but today Windows Server 2008 R2 is announcing that SP1 will deliver two important new features that directly affect Microsoft?s desktop virtualization stack: Dynamic Memory and RemoteFX.

Dynamic memory is an enhancement to Hyper-V in R2 and allows IT administrators to pool all the memory available on a physical host and dynamically distribute it to virtual machines running on that host as necessary. That means based on changes in workload, your VMs will be able to receive new memory allocations without a service interruption. For a deeper look at Dynamic Memory check here.

RemoteFX is the latest addition to Microsoft?s desktop virtualization stack. Using this new feature in Windows Server 2008 R2, you?ll be able to deliver an even richer and more user-transparent desktop virtualization experience. RemoteFX functions independently of any graphics stack and supports any screen content, including rich content like Silverlight or Flash. Because it uses virtualized graphics resources, RemoteFX works on a wide array of target devices, which means you can deploy it over both thick and thin client hosts and a wide variety of network configurations. For some more information on RemoteFX check here.

For Windows 7, SP1 includes only minor updates, among which are previous updates that are already delivered through Windows Update. SP1 for Windows 7 will, however, deliver an updated Remote Desktop client that takes advantage of RemoteFX introduced in the server-side with SP1 for Windows Server 2008 R2.

Microsoft is not yet announcing a beta or release timeline for SP1 for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 today. Once SP1 for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 is released, the service pack will be delivered through Windows Update and be available on Microsoft Download Center for download as well.

Source : WindowsTeamBlog + MSFT TechNet

The Windows 7 Service Pack really seems to be pointless... All currently released patches and a RDP update? Come on Microsoft!

EXACTLY what a service pack should contain. Not apps, not new major features.

Well now, come on people. Let's just step back and think about this for a second. So what we're saying here is that we WANT SP1 to contain lots of stuff and be jam-packed full of fixes. Well I don't know about you but the way I see it is that we're hoping that Windows 7 has many many bugs so that SP1 can have a purpose.....That's like wishing you'd get cancer just so that hospitals can have a chance to give you doses of chemotherapy and radiation.....:D I've been a tester for windows since windows xp and so far the Windows 7 testing experience had been quite a boring one because I had only submitted one major bug report among other pretty minor bugs. With Vista I had 92......In any case, I think Microsoft may have written themselves a pretty easy life-cycle with Windows 7. We'll see in the coming months when we'll have more details about SP1.

Well now, come on people. Let's just step back and think about this for a second. So what we're saying here is that we WANT SP1 to contain lots of stuff and be jam-packed full of fixes. Well I don't know about you but the way I see it is that we're hoping that Windows 7 has many many bugs so that SP1 can have a purpose.....That's like wishing you'd get cancer just so that hospitals can have a chance to give you doses of chemotherapy and radiation.....:D I've been a tester for windows since windows xp and so far the Windows 7 testing experience had been quite a boring one because I had only submitted one major bug report among other pretty minor bugs. With Vista I had 92......In any case, I think Microsoft may have written themselves a pretty easy life-cycle with Windows 7. We'll see in the coming months when we'll have more details about SP1.

Geeks just love fixing, even if it doesn't need to be fixed... :p

And you got me all excited... The Windows 7 Service Pack really seems to be pointless... All currently released patches and a RDP update? Come on Microsoft! :whistle:

Well win7 is already a very stable OS. Not much else it needs for sp if it needs one at all.

I just wish future service packs (SP2 when it arrives and later) for Windows 7 are all cumulative and Windows 8 service packs are slipstreamable again.

Who cares? :unsure:

It's Microsoft saying 'We sold you buggy software, and we're fixing it with SP1' so, well - great! Hooray?!! :fun:

Except they didn't as Win7 was very stable from release. Every OS has updates and patches/fixes released as the enviroment around them changes and they have to adapt to new threats and compatability issues (and also fixing existing ones too - nothing's perfect).

Well now, come on people. Let's just step back and think about this for a second. So what we're saying here is that we WANT SP1 to contain lots of stuff and be jam-packed full of fixes. Well I don't know about you but the way I see it is that we're hoping that Windows 7 has many many bugs so that SP1 can have a purpose.....That's like wishing you'd get cancer just so that hospitals can have a chance to give you doses of chemotherapy and radiation.....:D I've been a tester for windows since windows xp and so far the Windows 7 testing experience had been quite a boring one because I had only submitted one major bug report among other pretty minor bugs. With Vista I had 92......In any case, I think Microsoft may have written themselves a pretty easy life-cycle with Windows 7. We'll see in the coming months when we'll have more details about SP1.

I don't know how you test win7 but until now there are more than 500 bug fixes , security fixes and hot fixes . Only some of the fixes were updated on users clients PCs (these fixes were sent to OEMs only)

I don't know how you test win7 but until now there are more than 500 bug fixes , security fixes and hot fixes . Only some of the fixes were updated on users clients PCs (these fixes were sent to OEMs only)

Sure you're not including general updates in that, and stuff not directly related to Win7? (e.g. daylight savings updates, IE8 updates). Link please.

I'm not disputing that there might be 500 individual things for Win7 so far, but I think you're attempting to extrapolate too much out of it in order to paint Win7 in a bad light.

"General updates?" An update that applies to 7 is an update that applies to 7. Heck, even an IE8 update is a 7 update, because it's an OS component.

There have been hundreds released publicly for 7, plus a bunch that haven't. Generally only fixes for major vulnerabilities make it to Windows Update.

I don't see how this "paints Win 7 in a bad light." It is arguably the most complex software product out there. Of course it's going to have bugs. Of course Microsoft are going to fix them. Of course they're going to combine the updates into a Service Pack at some point. Of course it's rational for businesses to wait until SP1 to make sure the initial problems have been worked out. What's the big deal? I don't even see anything to "defend" here. Only people who believe Windows is some sort of infallible deity would even consider this noteworthy.

hdood, notice how I also said stuff like daylight savings updates? I don't know how you could legitimately call those "issues" with Windows 7.

Sure, 500 sounds like a large number, but I'd be interested to see what actually makes up those numbers.

ilev was insinuating that Win7 actually isn't that bug-free because of the "500" number, including calling into question ManOfMystery's experience of only finding one issue during testing.

hdood, notice how I also said stuff like daylight savings updates? I don't know how you could legitimately call those "issues" with Windows 7.

They aren't, but I don't think DST updates make up any notable amount. It's only a couple of countries that don't have fixed dates, isn't it? Regardless, there are lots of other updates.

Sure, 500 sounds like a large number, but I'd be interested to see what actually makes up those numbers.

Well, you'd have to search or go to something like kbupdate.info or whatever. I'm gonna let him answer for himself.

ilev was insinuating that Win7 actually isn't that bug-free because of the "500" number

I don't think saying that Windows 7 has lots of little bugs is a particularly bold statement. What doesn't? Hell, it will probably have shipped with thousands of known issues. I haven't bothered to count them, but the total amount of public and private fixes made so far probably are in the hundreds. This isn't controversial at all, and doesn't mean that Windows 7 sucks. It's just how software works.

including calling into question ManOfMystery's experience of only finding one issue during testing.

Wasn't he just pointing out that there are a lot of bugs? ManOfMystery's anecdote doesn't mean much, although he actually did not say he only found one bug. There was a massive amount of bug reports filed before it RTMed. That caught the most common ones. You'll never get them all until it actually ships though, and it really starts being deployed on all kinds of weird configurations. I mean, take KB979711. How many people even meet the requirements to trigger the bug at all? Not many. The number shrinks even more when you consider that it probably only happens sometimes, at "random." It's still a bug though, so it counts.

Please please can we have updated default drivers for SP1. There are many new drivers the gets improvement and stablity fixes after Windows 7 launch. A freashly installed Windows 7 SP1 should have those included by default. Add more hardware support drivers that wasn't availbe when 7 launch..... etc....

Wasn't he just pointing out that there are a lot of bugs? ManOfMystery's anecdote doesn't mean much, although he actually did not say he only found one bug. There was a massive amount of bug reports filed before it RTMed. That caught the most common ones. You'll never get them all until it actually ships though, and it really starts being deployed on all kinds of weird configurations. I mean, take KB979711. How many people even meet the requirements to trigger the bug at all? Not many. The number shrinks even more when you consider that it probably only happens sometimes, at "random." It's still a bug though, so it counts.

In general I agree, but regarding ManOfMystery's comment, he said:

I've been a tester for windows since windows xp and so far the Windows 7 testing experience had been quite a boring one because I had only submitted one major bug report among other pretty minor bugs. With Vista I had 92......In any case, I think Microsoft may have written themselves a pretty easy life-cycle with Windows 7. We'll see in the coming months when we'll have more details about SP1.

He said he found one bug in Win7 during beta testing.

I'm not saying Win7 is bug free, just getting annoying at ilev's unsubstantiated implications in this post:

I don't know how you test win7 but until now there are more than 500 bug fixes , security fixes and hot fixes . Only some of the fixes were updated on users clients PCs (these fixes were sent to OEMs only)

And you got me all excited... The Windows 7 Service Pack really seems to be pointless... All currently released patches and a RDP update? Come on Microsoft! :whistle:

Service packs are designed for corporations in mind. Imagine if you managed 5000 computers and had to install months worth of patches. Wouldn't just installing a Service Pack make your life so much easier?

From a RTM install there are a few updates for Win7, not as many as Vista during the time period. Service Packs where introduced when the internet was new and it was easier to update a network from a single big file instead of lots of smaller files. The process of waiting for SP1 was adopted from this.

Generally in todays world, waiting for SP1 helps companies not from the actual updates from the service pack itself (not saying they help) but from the fact they give companies time to test and also to note any show stopping bugs which may have crept in the RTM. It makes business sense to wait for SP1 to see how the OS shapes up. This is also true of Mac OSX, if you are rolling it over a business network and because the turn about is quicker it's not unusual for companies to wait for a .2 or a .3 release of OSX.

He said he found one bug in Win7 during beta testing.

Maybe that's what he meant, but I read it differently. It says "I had only submitted one major bug report among other pretty minor bugs" which I read as meaning he found one major bug and several minor ones. Not that it really matters.

I'm not saying Win7 is bug free, just getting annoying at ilev's unsubstantiated implications in this post:

I'm not going to defend his specific number, but I think you might be reading a little too much into it. Have there been a large number of "bug fixes, security fixes and hot fixes(?)"? Yes. Is it true that virtually all of these have to be downloaded manually and are not available on Windows Update? Yes. Is it true that there are also private updates that are even only made available to a small number (even one) of customers on demand. Yes. What's the issue here? Is it just the 500 number? Would it really make any difference if it was 200? Isn't the real point it's trying to make that there are lots of bugs in Windows 7 and that Microsoft has plenty of work to keep them busy, and that saying or implying that there's no need for a service pack is a bit silly? That's what I got out of it.

I just wish future service packs (SP2 when it arrives and later) for Windows 7 are all cumulative and Windows 8 service packs are slipstreamable again.

no, all Windows 7 service packs won't be slipstreamable. They way Windows 7 Updates work is mostly the same like in Vista.

Service packs are designed for corporations in mind. Imagine if you managed 5000 computers and had to install months worth of patches. Wouldn't just installing a Service Pack make your life so much easier?

Oh I know that. Where I work our Network Security guy does thousands of patches a year. We keep ghost images of all the computer models and update them on patch Tuesday and such to help with that. Regardless it's always going to be a fair amount of overhead work and Service Packs are spaced pretty far apart. Shoot, with Windows XP seeming to never die I think it's time for a Service Pack 4...

I'm very happy with Windows 7 and I am glad it's as stable and solid as it is. Looking at previous operating systems Microsoft really got it right this time. (Y)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!