microsoft
Report a problem

Vista Performance and Reliability Pack Unofficial Release

Steven Parker   on 30 July 2007 - 11:34 · 157 comments & 257818 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Thanks Nekrosoft for the news on this major update to Windows Vista that should for most of us improve the speed and reliability of Windows Vista significantly!

Please note: These fixes break all current methods of bypassing driver singing requirements except the good old F8 during boot (that you have to do every single time you start vista)

IF you are using Rivatuner, atitool and or Peerguardian on 64bit vista, you will have to use F8 every single time to disable driver signing requirements to use those two programs. x86 version is unaffected.

These updates should go official on the next patch Tuesday (in one weeks time). Please read more for the download links and information on these updates.

938979 Vista Performance and Reliability Pack
This update resolves a number of individual issues which may be affecting some computers running Windows Vista. These issues have been reported by customers using the Error Reporting service, product support, or other means. Installing this update will improve the performance and responsiveness for some scenarios and improves reliability of Windows Vista in a variety of scenarios. Some examples of the improvements contained in this update are:
  • Improves performance in resuming back to the desktop from the Photo and Windows Energy screensaver.
  • Resolves an issue where some secured web pages using advanced security technologies may not get displayed in Internet Explorer on Windows Vista.
  • Resolves an issue where a shared printer may not get installed if the printer is connected to a Windows XP or Windows Server 2003 system and User Access Control is disabled on the Vista client.
  • Resolves an issue where creating AVI files on Vista may get corrupted.
  • Improves the performance in calculating the ‘estimated time remaining’ when copying/moving large files.
  • Improves performance in bringing up Login Screen after resuming from Hibernate.
  • Resolves an issue where synchronization of offline files to a server can get corrupted.
  • Resolves a compatibility issue with RAW images created by Canon EOS 1D/1DS Digital SLR Camera which can lead to data loss. This only affects RAW images created by these two specific camera models.
  • Resolves an issue where a computer can lose its default Gateway address when resuming from sleep mode.
  • Improves the performance when copying or moving entire directories containing large amounts of data or files.
  • Improves the performance of Vista’s Memory Manager in specific customer scenarios and prevents some issues which may lead to memory corruption.
938194 Vista Compatibility and Reliability Pack
This update resolves a number of individual issues which may be affecting some computers running Windows Vista. These issues have been reported by customers using the Error Reporting service, product support, or other means. Installing this update will improve the reliability and hardware compatibility of Windows Vista in a variety of scenarios. Some examples of the improvements contained in this update are:
  • Improved reliability and compatibility of Vista when used with newer graphics cards in several specific scenarios and configurations.
  • Improved reliability when working with external displays on a laptop.
  • Increased compatibility with many video drivers.
  • Improved visual appearance of games with high intensity graphics.
  • Improved quality of playback for HD-DVD and Blue-Ray disks on large monitors.
  • Improved reliability for Internet Explorer when some third party toolbars are installed on Vista.
  • Improved Vista reliability in networking configuration scenarios.
  • Improved the reliability of Windows Calendar in Vista.
  • Improved reliability of systems that were upgraded from XP to Vista.
  • Increased compatibility with many printer drivers.
  • Increased reliability and performance of Vista when entering sleep and resuming from sleep.
Link: Neowin Forum Discussion Thanks Nekrosoft
Download: Vista Compatibility and Reliability Pack for x64 or x86 version

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 157 additional comments
#1 RanCorX2 on 30 Jul 2007 - 11:41
just to make sure people understand, the following ONLY applies to vista 64bit! Those using 32bit vista will be fine.

"These fixes break all current methods of bypassing driver singing requirements except the good old F8 during boot (that you have to do every single time you start vista)"
(1 reply) #2 :: Lyon :: on 30 Jul 2007 - 11:47
Yay Yay!
Downloading now
#2.1 excalpius on 31 Jul 2007 - 11:05
This was probably what those MS leakers were talking about when they discussed "Vista SP1 beta" coming out this week. Since, for all intents and purposes this sounds like some major overhaul updates.
(5 replies) #3 stgeorge on 30 Jul 2007 - 11:48
Sounds like a mini-SP1. I wonder why MS doesn't just abandon the idea of "Service Packs" and just release these fixes through Windows Update throughout the year. They are very easy to slipstream into a Vista install unlike in XP.
#3.1 randomnut on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:01
Because service packs are tested, tested again, then re-tested before release (or should be anyway). Hotfixes are thrown together in 5 mins and chucked out there.
#3.2 cork1958 on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:19
Quote - (randomnut said @ #3.1)
Because service packs are tested, tested again, then re-tested before release (or should be anyway). Hotfixes are thrown together in 5 mins and chucked out there.


I think they should be issued as single, monthly patches also instead of some massive 200MB plus service pack. Heck, a service pack is nothing much more than ALL the updates thrown together anyway and usually not tested well enough either. Just like the whole VistaMe2 OS!!
#3.3 MMaster23 on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:47
Quote - (stgeorge said @ #3)
Sounds like a mini-SP1. I wonder why MS doesn't just abandon the idea of "Service Packs" and just release these fixes through Windows Update throughout the year. They are very easy to slipstream into a Vista install unlike in XP.


for reference purposes ... eg costumers find it easier to compare systems marked with service packs. XP SP2 is a proven platform while XP "vanilla" sucks. I have found out that this is not the case with Vista tough. heavily tested and developed with an different business/development model.

thus eliminating the "need" for an first SP. still vista SP1 is in people's mind a "major improvement". these days the systems run better with "hotpacks" like these.

Just installed .. saw some improvement in explorer (copy/delete etc) performance. Dare i say with caution .. this update rocks.
#3.4 randomnut on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:51
Quote - (cork1958 said @ #3.2)
Quote - (randomnut said @ #3.1)
Because service packs are tested, tested again, then re-tested before release (or should be anyway). Hotfixes are thrown together in 5 mins and chucked out there.


I think they should be issued as single, monthly patches also instead of some massive 200MB plus service pack. Heck, a service pack is nothing much more than ALL the updates thrown together anyway and usually not tested well enough either. Just like the whole VistaMe2 OS!!


Yeah good point, they do take far too long to fix some major issues, just because they're not 'critical security issues' etc.
#3.5 +Brandon Live on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:17
Quote - (cork1958 said @ #3.2)
Heck, a service pack is nothing much more than ALL the updates thrown together anyway and usually not tested well enough either.


Well that's just not true at all. A Service Pack goes through extremely rigorous testing (basically the same as any OS release).
(1 reply) #4 FloatingFatMan on 30 Jul 2007 - 11:52
Umm.. This story's already been posted to the front page news...

http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=41687
#4.1 Shane Pitman on 30 Jul 2007 - 11:57
That was just a "heads up" and didn't actually include any downloads.
#5 lordofangels on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:33
the next patch Tuesday is 2 weeks tomorrow, the 14th Aug
(1 reply) #6 gadean on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:39
WOW. Lots of updates rolled into just two hotfixes? Excellent, glad to see some of the performance issues being addressed.

Now I'd like to see the SD memory problem fixed.
#6.1 NPGMBR on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:50
No doubt. I've been disappointed by the performace of Vista. I still think its a great OS but I have to reboot at least once a day because something has made the OS unstable.

I had gotten so used to how stable XP was that I just assumed Vista would be the same. But I had also forgotten that when I was Beta testing XP it was also qutie unstable even after the official release but it got dramatically better over time.
#7 Zip on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:41
thank you! finally my file transfers are xp speed!
(3 replies) #8 graigchq on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:42
Quote -
Improves the performance in calculating the ‘estimated time remaining’ when copying/moving large files.


thats what i was looking for. Assuming this works, i'll no longer have to boot into XP just to transfer music onto my mp3 player, or copy files to my laptop.

THat particular problem was doing my head right in.
#8.1 miguel_montes on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:46
About time!! It only took... what... about 9 months...?
#8.2 EduardValencia on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:16
I guess all that hotfixes need alot of work

So If u were the guy coding these fixes,we would never get them! so shut up!
#8.3 +Chicane-UK on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:34
Quote -
So If u were the guy coding these fixes,we would never get them! so shut up!


Are you a share holder in Microsoft or something? Stop defending them so much! Microsoft deserve a little criticism from time to time!
(7 replies) #9 InsaneNutter on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:44
This might mean I can actually use sleep and hibernate on my laptop now, at the moment when ever I try to use either one the network connection does not work when the laptop resumes, the only way to fix it is by shutting down which kind of makes sleep and hibernate pointless.
#9.1 buletov on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:47
Yes but with Vista you get shiny user interface and blurry fonts!
You can't work without that, now can you?
#9.2 JiveMasterT on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:07
Vista News also comes with free trolls! Nice!
#9.3 ZombieFly on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:35
Quote - (JiveMasterT said @ #9.2)
Vista News also comes with free trolls! Nice!


only ultimate edition has trolls, which are still in alpha.
#9.4 MioTheGreat on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:22
Quote -
and blurry fonts!


On very high resolution monitors (1920x1200 15.4" ) , text looks like crap without cleartype. It's only "Blurry" on weird LCDs, or on CRTs.
#9.5 InsaneNutter on 30 Jul 2007 - 17:25
Nope this update does not fix it, I still need to re start after hibernating or putting the computer to sleep if I want to use the net
#9.6 Budious on 30 Jul 2007 - 17:31
Quote - (MioTheGreat said @ #9.4)
Quote -
and blurry fonts!


On very high resolution monitors (1920x1200 15.4" ) , text looks like crap without cleartype. It's only "Blurry" on weird LCDs, or on CRTs.


I wondered why it looked like crap on my 1920x1200 17" laptop screen. I have 120 dpi enabled also. Where is the "cleartype" feature enabled/disabled at?
#9.7 reddragon72 on 31 Jul 2007 - 20:54
Quote - (InsaneNutter said @ #9.5)
Nope this update does not fix it, I still need to re start after hibernating or putting the computer to sleep if I want to use the net


don't reboot, just open device manager, right click on your device that is failing to reconnect and select disable. now wait 5 seconds or so then reenable it. connection restored. Also drivers that are downloaded or ITB(in the bo from microsoft have this issue, but drivers from the actual manufacturing company do not, so if you have a wireless intel device go to intel and get there driver. I have this issue on most of my systems, and getting the driver from the actual manufacture of the device resolves the problem.
#10 Bryan84 on 30 Jul 2007 - 12:57
So not for me who uses Vista Home?
#11 usman767 on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:03
Dude, i think it will work for all the vista editions...
#12 gizbug on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:09
So what is this about driver signing in vista 64?
If we install both these updates, we can't use peerguardian?
(2 replies) #13 Flint2 on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:09
I do hope that Neowin realizes that posting download links to these Hotfixes is a violation of the rules stated on Connect since these Hotfixes are not supposed to be publicly available yet.
#13.1 MrCobra on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:48
Yet if you had posted these you'd be warned for posting "warez" because they aren't official yet. A link to this page has been sent to those in charge of Connect.
#13.2 Xtreme2damax on 02 Aug 2007 - 00:55
Quote - (MrCobra said @ #13.1)
Yet if you had posted these you'd be warned for posting "warez" because they aren't official yet. A link to this page has been sent to those in charge of Connect.


I think someone forgot to take their medicine

Read below, yes they stated for them not to be public but technically they can't do anything about it since these are going to be released for free anyways. Warez/Piracy only applies to commercial products, not those that will be released for free.

Even if it got as far as court, it would likely be thrown out as soon as it was mentioned these would be released for free.

I mean how is a freely released fix going to harm a company financially since there is no revenue to be had to begin with.

Stop whining, shut up, download them and be happy instead of acting like an ass. Don't ruin it for all of us because you were having a bad day. I know what it is, you will get rewarded by M$ for reporting these and live like a king with no worries because you are a perfect, modest, honest citizen that does no wrong, right? Call me when you get that check from Miracle Soft as a reward for reporting this, better yet send me a postcard form the resort you are spending time in from the tropics. I sure such honesty and modesty don't deserve to go unrewarded does it?

I'm sure this news post would of already been taking care of and deleted if there was anything that could be done by M$ if this is supposed "Warez" Like you claim it is.

These may not be official, but it is not warez either.

Last edited by Xtreme2damax on 02 Aug 2007 - 01:09
(1 reply) #14 usman767 on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:14
I think neowin should remove the links as they are not legal at the moment. Also because i already got the files on my disk
#14.1 Flint2 on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:17
Heh, its not really about having them, they should probably/hopefully be out next month and in better quality, its that Neowin is not meant to be a site that posts illegal download links.
(1 reply) #15 gizbug on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:15
Stop crying about the links. IF you dont want to dl it, dont. A lot of people appreciate the links.
#15.1 Flint2 on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:19
It is *not* about wanting or not wanting to download it, I'm sure many people would love to have it, but guess what, under MS's License Terms on Connect, it is *illegal* and Neowin is the *only* MS Community site that is posting download links to them (ActiveWin/AeroXP/WinBeta are not) and this story originated from the AeroXP forums after all.
#16 Uncle_Bingo on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:25
I don't suppose on the "compatibility" end of this they will be fixing the Admin Tools functionality? I still don't see how MS can market Vista in any business capacity when its practically useless for Active Directory and Exchange Admins. Expecting us to remote desktop to a server or use some half-baked sort-of works hack to install the Admin tools is a sad joke. Either fix the tools or make a Vista Admin Edition!
(19 replies) #17 Azmodan on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:32
Funny, I just upgraded to my old Windows XP x64 after the continuous and crazy lock-ups. Microsoft, ASUS nor Nvidia would give me proper support, after telling each one of them that Vista suddenly stops responding in a total freeze, where even the LED's are stuck, and I've got the latest drivers for each one of them.

I've got to the point that I had to make an ISO with nLite, insert Nvidia's RAID drivers into my Windows installation (the ones that came with the CD, because the most recent ones produces an instant BSOD trying to load Windows) to use a stable, non-freezing system that I can listen to online radios without Winamp being closing every 5 seconds.

Oh, i've saved a copy of my Vista in my HDD. If Vista ever get's stable (or gets out of the public beta stage -- troll intended), i'll try to install it. Meanwhile, my dog is having tons of fun times with the shinny cd.

Specs:
ASUS W2N32-SLI Wireless Edition
AMD FX 2.8Ghz Windsor
EVGA GeForce 8800GTS
#17.1 ZombieFly on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:59
Quote - (Azmodan said @ #1)
Funny, I just upgraded to my old Windows XP x64 after the continuous and crazy lock-ups. Microsoft, ASUS nor Nvidia would give me proper support, after telling each one of them that Vista suddenly stops responding in a total freeze, where even the LED's are stuck, and I've got the latest drivers for each one of them.

I've got to the point that I had to make an ISO with nLite, insert Nvidia's RAID drivers into my Windows installation (the ones that came with the CD, because the most recent ones produces an instant BSOD trying to load Windows) to use a stable, non-freezing system that I can listen to online radios without Winamp being closing every 5 seconds.

Oh, i've saved a copy of my Vista in my HDD. If Vista ever get's stable (or gets out of the public beta stage -- troll intended), i'll try to install it. Meanwhile, my dog is having tons of fun times with the shinny cd.

Specs:
ASUS W2N32-SLI Wireless Edition
AMD FX 2.8Ghz Windsor
EVGA GeForce 8800GTS



somehow i doubt the problems you experienced are to do with vista. Sounds like you have some dodgy memory or something. I've been using vista on a number of different hardware configurations and i've yet to see any such behaviour.
#17.2 Azmodan on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:37
Quote - (ZombieFly said @ #17.1)
somehow i doubt the problems you experienced are to do with vista. Sounds like you have some dodgy memory or something. I've been using vista on a number of different hardware configurations and i've yet to see any such behaviour.


* Memtest ranned perfectly. 5 out of 5 times it completed perfectly. No errors, since it doesn't runs on Windows.
* Prime95 ends frozen up in Vista, in 7 out of 8 tests it ends up in a complete lock-up. Prime95 completes perfectly in WinXP x64, 5 out of 5.

If you think my tests are fake, you could buy my system and test it out. I've given the specs in my first post. Oh, you'll be surprised by it's behavior, by the point that you would send your system back to where you bought it because you think it's defective when it's Vista. (I live in Panama, and I've bought it on USA. Monetary reasons, this thing is valued 3,500$ in here)

You could Google for Vista Freeze ASUS M2N32-SLI, one of the guys making those articles is me (Icrontic has a whole thread about it, with 45+ pages of complains, since the companies I mentioned doesn't give a bloody hell to help you)
#17.3 HeartsOfWar on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:26
I'm running an Asus Striker Extreme using latest bios and nForce drivers on Vista x64 and I haven't had any problems (I think anyone "in the know" of Asus knows this mobo has been plagued to death with problems).

I'm also running an Asus 8800 ultra using the latest forceware...

I highly doubt Vista is the problem. Either your RAM isn't completely compatible (did you consult the Qualified list?) or you're over clocking...
#17.4 Azmodan on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:37
Quote - (HeartsOfWar said @ #17.3)
I'm running an Asus Striker Extreme using latest bios and nForce drivers on Vista x64 and I haven't had any problems (I think anyone "in the know" of Asus knows this mobo has been plagued to death with problems).

I'm also running an Asus 8800 ultra using the latest forceware...

I highly doubt Vista is the problem. Either your RAM isn't completely compatible (did you consult the Qualified list?) or you're over clocking...


No... read the post above...

Doesn't makes sense to me, why would a defective/incompatible RAM would die in Vista and not in XP after doing exactly the same stress tests and using the exact applications? Occam's Razor
#17.5 Raptor on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:59
Quote - (Azmodan said @ #17.4)
Quote - (HeartsOfWar said @ #17.3)
I'm running an Asus Striker Extreme using latest bios and nForce drivers on Vista x64 and I haven't had any problems (I think anyone "in the know" of Asus knows this mobo has been plagued to death with problems).

I'm also running an Asus 8800 ultra using the latest forceware...

I highly doubt Vista is the problem. Either your RAM isn't completely compatible (did you consult the Qualified list?) or you're over clocking...


No... read the post above...

Doesn't makes sense to me, why would a defective/incompatible RAM would die in Vista and not in XP after doing exactly the same stress tests and using the exact applications? Occam's Razor


Vista's memory management model is vastly different than XP's that's why. I work for a software company and we've seen Vista cause issues in programs that *appeared* to run fine before. When we'd actually take a look, we'd find issues with the programs that while they worked in the past, weren't guaranteed to (addressing an invalid memory range, etc).

Vista is a very stable OS. Your issues are all but guaranteed to be caused by hardware issues. Just because your program passes a diagnostic program in a limited environment does not guarantee the hardware is working fine. All it takes is one single memory corruption to bring down a system, and that's far more likely while you're using CPU/GPU/Ram all at once (i.e. it could be a voltage issue).

Vista is an extremely solid OS. I've been using it since it came out without issue.
Ironically I remember a similar issue with people upgrading from ME/98 on bad hardware and claiming XP was more unstable.
#17.6 jesseinsf on 30 Jul 2007 - 18:36
If you are getting the BSOD in Vista, this means it's a hardware/software problem. Go here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/...adeadvisor.mspx

Test your hardware for compatibility. And don't slipsteam yet because "nLite" is still in beta. Plus Don't install winamp since it is not compatible with vista yet (AOL is slow at rewriting the "WinAmp" program). WinAmp now will F-Up the graphics and ruin your system.

When you install Vista, install the drivers when Vista asks for them. And make sure the drivers are SIGNED. Plus do not install ANY PROGRAMS that are NOT in the SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS of the program's specs. btw, when vista asks for drivers at install, it's different than how XP does it...you can actually extract the drivers on a USB thumb drive and point vista to it....it's much easier than how XP does it.
#17.7 HeartsOfWar on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:33
As other people have mentioned, saying something works in XP is not a true testament that Vista is the problem.

First of all, one of the biggest changes in Vista Memory management is that it uses resources a lot more aggressively: caching HDD reads / writes to memory, effectively using all the memory it can. XP does not take the aggressive stance and only *tries* to use what it needs... so you could effectively have a bad RAM module and not even know it... until you switch to Vista.

Second, how many memory modules do you have? The ASUS Striker Extreme motherboard had an issue with instability when all four slots were in use. Thankfully, this has been fixed but could be a source of trouble for you as well.

Third, you never answered if you were over clocking... if you're over clocking, back it down and see what happens. No offense, but I find it amusing that people have the nerve to over clock their processors and then balk at instability issues.
#17.8 Azmodan on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:34
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.6)
If you are getting the BSOD in Vista, this means it's a hardware/software problem. Go here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/...adeadvisor.mspx

Test your hardware for compatibility. And don't slipsteam yet because "nLite" is still in beta. Plus Don't install winamp since it is not compatible with vista yet (AOL is slow at rewriting the "WinAmp" program). WinAmp now will F-Up the graphics and ruin your system.

When you install Vista, install the drivers when Vista asks for them. And make sure the drivers are SIGNED. Plus do not install ANY PROGRAMS that are NOT in the SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS of the program's specs. btw, when vista asks for drivers at install, it's different than how XP does it...you can actually extract the drivers on a USB thumb drive and point vista to it....it's much easier than how XP does it.


Well, Windows XP x64 installed without any problems when I added the Nvidia NRaid driver. Windows XP x64 doesn't recognizes the RAID because there aren't any textmode drivers that supports it on installation, so I had to do it.

Strangely, Winamp was running on legacy mode (Selected to run as Windows XP SP2), and it was working properly until a Vista update.

I did select the drivers when Vista told me about them. (Tip: You can select individual drivers and their locations in Windows XP. It's written as an advanced select option.)

The problem with Vista was NOT a BSOD, it was a TOTAL FREEZE. (Like, you can't move the mouse, keyboard doesn't responds, screen is frozen, LED signals are frozen too. A total LOCK-UP)

Vista's memory management... don't know about that because it was weird when the system crashed while viewing photos using the Photo Viewer application that came with Vista (or whatever the name of that program is)... If that's the case, people at Microsoft needs to write their programs properly...
#17.9 Azmodan on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:41
Quote - (HeartsOfWar said @ #17.7)
As other people have mentioned, saying something works in XP is not a true testament that Vista is the problem.

First of all, one of the biggest changes in Vista Memory management is that it uses resources a lot more aggressively: caching HDD reads / writes to memory, effectively using all the memory it can. XP does not take the aggressive stance and only *tries* to use what it needs... so you could effectively have a bad RAM module and not even know it... until you switch to Vista.

Second, how many memory modules do you have? The ASUS Striker Extreme motherboard had an issue with instability when all four slots were in use. Thankfully, this has been fixed but could be a source of trouble for you as well.

Third, you never answered if you were over clocking... if you're over clocking, back it down and see what happens. No offense, but I find it amusing that people have the nerve to over clock their processors and then balk at instability issues.


No, there's nothing overclocked on it. I have 2 2GB Mushkin sticks (4GB total), I've even changed positions from 1 & 2 to 3 & 4, and I saw the same results. I've adjusted the memory to fit the CAS latency of it on the BIOS tool. If I had a bad memory, I guess memtest would had discovered it? I used the x64 version of the program.
#17.10 jesseinsf on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:25
Quote - (Azmodan said @ #17.
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.6)
If you are getting the BSOD in Vista, this means it's a hardware/software problem. Go here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/...adeadvisor.mspx

Test your hardware for compatibility. And don't slipsteam yet because "nLite" is still in beta. Plus Don't install winamp since it is not compatible with vista yet (AOL is slow at rewriting the "WinAmp" program). WinAmp now will F-Up the graphics and ruin your system.

When you install Vista, install the drivers when Vista asks for them. And make sure the drivers are SIGNED. Plus do not install ANY PROGRAMS that are NOT in the SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS of the program's specs. btw, when vista asks for drivers at install, it's different than how XP does it...you can actually extract the drivers on a USB thumb drive and point vista to it....it's much easier than how XP does it.


Well, Windows XP x64 installed without any problems when I added the Nvidia NRaid driver. Windows XP x64 doesn't recognizes the RAID because there aren't any textmode drivers that supports it on installation, so I had to do it.

Strangely, Winamp was running on legacy mode (Selected to run as Windows XP SP2), and it was working properly until a Vista update.

I did select the drivers when Vista told me about them. (Tip: You can select individual drivers and their locations in Windows XP. It's written as an advanced select option.)

The problem with Vista was NOT a BSOD, it was a TOTAL FREEZE. (Like, you can't move the mouse, keyboard doesn't responds, screen is frozen, LED signals are frozen too. A total LOCK-UP)

Vista's memory management... don't know about that because it was weird when the system crashed while viewing photos using the Photo Viewer application that came with Vista (or whatever the name of that program is)... If that's the case, people at Microsoft needs to write their programs properly...


Again, "WinAmp" is not "DESIGNED" for Vista. To be technical, WinAmp uses a part of DirectX 9 that vista no longer supports. So it messes with the "Remote Procedure Call" service that will make your system do allot of bad stuff. Try viewing pictures before you install Winamp on a fresh install. Now if you are using a "CRACKED" version of vista then there is no help to ya. And make sure ALL Drivers are "MADE" for windows "VISTA". And MAKE sure 110% of all your programs are not "CRACKED" programs and that they are "MADE" for windows VISTA. (If you are running 64bit edition then make sure you see 64bit edition in the requirements as well)If any of your programs "DON'T" say that they are MADE for Vista on their website (or on the BOX" then this may be the problem...so don't install them. Last is to make sure (When installing) you have a copy of VISTA that is fresh from the press and not tampered with or slipstreamed.
#17.11 ZombieFly on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:46
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.6)
If you are getting the BSOD in Vista, this means it's a hardware/software problem. Go here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/...adeadvisor.mspx

Test your hardware for compatibility. And don't slipsteam yet because "nLite" is still in beta. Plus Don't install winamp since it is not compatible with vista yet (AOL is slow at rewriting the "WinAmp" program). WinAmp now will F-Up the graphics and ruin your system.

When you install Vista, install the drivers when Vista asks for them. And make sure the drivers are SIGNED. Plus do not install ANY PROGRAMS that are NOT in the SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS of the program's specs. btw, when vista asks for drivers at install, it's different than how XP does it...you can actually extract the drivers on a USB thumb drive and point vista to it....it's much easier than how XP does it.


what are the problems with winamp you speak of? i've never had a single problem, it's my most used application and i have it running constantly.. what's it supposed to "F-Up" with the graphics?
#17.12 rm20010 on 30 Jul 2007 - 22:47
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.10)
Again, "WinAmp" is not "DESIGNED" for Vista. To be technical, WinAmp uses a part of DirectX 9 that vista no longer supports. So it messes with the "Remote Procedure Call" service that will make your system do allot of bad stuff. Try viewing pictures before you install Winamp on a fresh install.


Could installing Winamp be the reason why the fullscreen slideshow is so stuttery for me?
#17.13 jesseinsf on 30 Jul 2007 - 23:27
Quote - (rm20010 said @ #17.12)
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.10)
Again, "WinAmp" is not "DESIGNED" for Vista. To be technical, WinAmp uses a part of DirectX 9 that vista no longer supports. So it messes with the "Remote Procedure Call" service that will make your system do allot of bad stuff. Try viewing pictures before you install Winamp on a fresh install.


Could installing Winamp be the reason why the fullscreen slideshow is so stuttery for me?


Yes, it also made my media center stutter. Graphics were shot to hell. And then I did a disk cleanup and to my surprise I realized that it really did a disk cleanup. Everything under "C" was deleted...had to reinstall...thanks to winamp.....This is why I say to make sure VISTA is in the system requirements of any program or driver. if you only see 2000/xp then don't install the program unless you are beta testing...
#17.14 rm20010 on 30 Jul 2007 - 23:34
Apart from Winamp installing Sonic's burning engine that has been problematic for some, I can't see what Winamp installs that will cause things to screw up that bad. You also mentioned Winamp calls some part of DirectX 9 that is no longer supported. Will installing the DX9 runtime for Vista fix that?

In any case, I'll do another clean Vista install without Winamp and see how it goes. Thanks for that heads up.
#17.15 jesseinsf on 31 Jul 2007 - 05:38
Quote - (rm20010 said @ #17.14)
Apart from Winamp installing Sonic's burning engine that has been problematic for some, I can't see what Winamp installs that will cause things to screw up that bad. You also mentioned Winamp calls some part of DirectX 9 that is no longer supported. Will installing the DX9 runtime for Vista fix that?

In any case, I'll do another clean Vista install without Winamp and see how it goes. Thanks for that heads up.


I Believe that DirectDraw is emulated in Direct3D now. Just as DirectX 1-5 is now in XP with DX9. anything that uses DirectDraw apps will cause unpredictable problems. Winamp uses DirectDraw (A part of DX9). So wait for a Vista version to be released.
#17.16 Azmodan on 31 Jul 2007 - 13:31
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.10)
Again, "WinAmp" is not "DESIGNED" for Vista. To be technical, WinAmp uses a part of DirectX 9 that vista no longer supports. So it messes with the "Remote Procedure Call" service that will make your system do allot of bad stuff. Try viewing pictures before you install Winamp on a fresh install. Now if you are using a "CRACKED" version of vista then there is no help to ya. And make sure ALL Drivers are "MADE" for windows "VISTA". And MAKE sure 110% of all your programs are not "CRACKED" programs and that they are "MADE" for windows VISTA. (If you are running 64bit edition then make sure you see 64bit edition in the requirements as well)If any of your programs "DON'T" say that they are MADE for Vista on their website (or on the BOX" then this may be the problem...so don't install them. Last is to make sure (When installing) you have a copy of VISTA that is fresh from the press and not tampered with or slipstreamed.


Ok, so what are you trying to tell me that the legacy mode option is just a fancy thing that doesn't haves an actual function? Woah, Microsoft programmers should've been very lazy to just making a drop-down menu without any function at all...

Second, almost all the software I use is GPL (or freeware): OpenOffice.org, GIMP, X-Chat, Pidgin, ect... I don't have to "CRACK" any software, and my Vista is LEGAL. All the drivers where made for Vista, I've got them in the ASUS website.

My copy of Vista wasn't tampered with anything, my Windows XP x64 is.

God, I don't know why I've ever mentioned about my problem with Vista, I'm not a kid that's trying to build a tank out of a PC case, I did everything anyone could do to make it work, and IT DIDN'T.
#17.17 jesseinsf on 31 Jul 2007 - 19:38
Quote - (Azmodan said @ #17.16)
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.10)
Again, "WinAmp" is not "DESIGNED" for Vista. To be technical, WinAmp uses a part of DirectX 9 that vista no longer supports. So it messes with the "Remote Procedure Call" service that will make your system do allot of bad stuff. Try viewing pictures before you install Winamp on a fresh install. Now if you are using a "CRACKED" version of vista then there is no help to ya. And make sure ALL Drivers are "MADE" for windows "VISTA". And MAKE sure 110% of all your programs are not "CRACKED" programs and that they are "MADE" for windows VISTA. (If you are running 64bit edition then make sure you see 64bit edition in the requirements as well)If any of your programs "DON'T" say that they are MADE for Vista on their website (or on the BOX" then this may be the problem...so don't install them. Last is to make sure (When installing) you have a copy of VISTA that is fresh from the press and not tampered with or slipstreamed.


Ok, so what are you trying to tell me that the legacy mode option is just a fancy thing that doesn't haves an actual function? Woah, Microsoft programmers should've been very lazy to just making a drop-down menu without any function at all...

Second, almost all the software I use is GPL (or freeware): OpenOffice.org, GIMP, X-Chat, Pidgin, ect... I don't have to "CRACK" any software, and my Vista is LEGAL. All the drivers where made for Vista, I've got them in the ASUS website.

My copy of Vista wasn't tampered with anything, my Windows XP x64 is.


God, I don't know why I've ever mentioned about my problem with Vista, I'm not a kid that's trying to build a tank out of a PC case, I did everything anyone could do to make it work, and IT DIDN'T.


You know Vista has a memory test feature. the same way you choose to boot to safe mode. there should be an option that tests your memory. Try that......also keep in mind that vista handles memory differently than in the previous OSes. So that memory tester you were using is obsolete. (Hopefully this will solve your problem)

oh, and reading above, you say you use the following: OpenOffice.org, GIMP, X-Chat, Pidgin....I'll tell you that the only program that seems to not have a problem is OpenOffice. all those other programs use DirectDraw which can make your Vista do unpridictable bad things. all the IRC freeware chat programs are bad news to Vista on allot of machines. Just wait awhile for Vista to be added in the "System Requirements" of these programs.

Last edited by jesseinsf on 31 Jul 2007 - 19:53
#17.18 ZombieFly on 01 Aug 2007 - 07:34
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.15)
Quote - (rm20010 said @ #17.14)
Apart from Winamp installing Sonic's burning engine that has been problematic for some, I can't see what Winamp installs that will cause things to screw up that bad. You also mentioned Winamp calls some part of DirectX 9 that is no longer supported. Will installing the DX9 runtime for Vista fix that?

In any case, I'll do another clean Vista install without Winamp and see how it goes. Thanks for that heads up.


I Believe that DirectDraw is emulated in Direct3D now. Just as DirectX 1-5 is now in XP with DX9. anything that uses DirectDraw apps will cause unpredictable problems. Winamp uses DirectDraw (A part of DX9). So wait for a Vista version to be released.


do you have any evidence to support these wild claims? like i say, i've been using winamp in vista since beta stage and i've never had a single issue with jumpy video, my c drive being erased or anything remotely strange happen.

Sources please + explain why i dont have an issue?
#17.19 jesseinsf on 01 Aug 2007 - 19:58
Quote - (ZombieFly said @ #17.1
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #17.15)
Quote - (rm20010 said @ #17.14)
Apart from Winamp installing Sonic's burning engine that has been problematic for some, I can't see what Winamp installs that will cause things to screw up that bad. You also mentioned Winamp calls some part of DirectX 9 that is no longer supported. Will installing the DX9 runtime for Vista fix that?

In any case, I'll do another clean Vista install without Winamp and see how it goes. Thanks for that heads up.


I Believe that DirectDraw is emulated in Direct3D now. Just as DirectX 1-5 is now in XP with DX9. anything that uses DirectDraw apps will cause unpredictable problems. Winamp uses DirectDraw (A part of DX9). So wait for a Vista version to be released.


do you have any evidence to support these wild claims? like i say, i've been using winamp in vista since beta stage and i've never had a single issue with jumpy video, my c drive being erased or anything remotely strange happen.

Sources please + explain why i dont have an issue?


Please tell me about your system? Different systems have different results.
(1 reply) #18 Flint2 on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:59
Since no one seems to care about the illegality of posting the above download links, perhaps we should starting posting public download links to *every* private download from Connect...

PS: I do hope that Neowin's Admins remember what happened when TheHotfix posted private WHS downloads
#18.1 Aeden on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:49
i was thinking the same thing....naturally someone will come to their senses
(1 reply) #19 Express on 30 Jul 2007 - 13:59
I can wait for two weeks for the official release.
I keep my machine clean of third-party software running at startup and loading themselves in browsers. So I haven't had any problems with reliability.
#19.1 8-n-1 on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:14
Quote - (Express said @ #19)
I can wait for two weeks for the official release.
I keep my machine clean of third-party software running at startup and loading themselves in browsers. So I haven't had any problems with reliability.


Yes, keep that pesky 3rd party software far away, just like MS wants you to. How well we're being trained...
#20 SpyCatcher on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:05
As a Vista user I can the fixes do help. Everything works better...


Thank you for posting.
(2 replies) #21 gizbug on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:05
Flint2: Always takes one in the crowd to ruin it for everyone (points finger at you)
#21.1 Flint2 on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:10
What don't people seem to understand here? Neowin, as far as I know, does not post links to illegal downloads and these, just like the WHS downloads from TheHotfix many months ago, are *exactly* that.

Edit: Is it when the benefits outweigh the legality issue that one starts breaking the rules?

Last edited by Flint2 on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:19
#21.2 NightmarE D on 30 Jul 2007 - 18:06
Quote - (Flint2 said @ #21.1)
What don't people seem to understand here? Neowin, as far as I know, does not post links to illegal downloads and these, just like the WHS downloads from TheHotfix many months ago, are *exactly* that.

Edit: Is it when the benefits outweigh the legality issue that one starts breaking the rules?


Why don't you try getting some facts straight?

The Hotfix LEAKED the full Windows Home Server OS (not just little WHS downloads) and these are hotfixes for Vista. If you were Microsoft, which would you have a bigger issue with? A couple hotfixes that could fix MASS PROBLEMS for Vista users or an entire home server OS?

Look at all the people on here that have already downloaded the hotfixes and said how good they work and how much faster Vista is. It fixes a lot of the problems that have been around for months. This might help to get others using Vista. I think it's safe to say Microsoft wouldn't have a problem with that IMHO.
(6 replies) #22 nickels on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:18
can this download be used for x86?
#22.1 Azmodan on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:42
Download: Vista Compatibility and Reliability Pack for x64 or x86 version

I guess so? Why #1 says that it's only for x64?!?!
#22.2 jwjw1 on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:18
#1 been drinking out of the 'clueless jug'
#22.3 Rogueosb on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:59
#1 was referring to: "These fixes break all current methods of bypassing driver singing requirements except the good old F8 during boot (that you have to do every single time you start vista)" being a problem for x64 only
#22.4 Xenomorph on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:17
Quote - (Azmodan said @ #22.1)
Download: Vista Compatibility and Reliability Pack for x64 or x86 version

I guess so? Why #1 says that it's only for x64?!?!


i guess english isnt your first language.

#1 never said this was only for x64.
#22.5 Azmodan on 31 Jul 2007 - 13:41
Quote - (Xenomorph said @ #22.4)
Quote - (Azmodan said @ #22.1)
Download: Vista Compatibility and Reliability Pack for x64 or x86 version

I guess so? Why #1 says that it's only for x64?!?!


i guess english isnt your first language.

#1 never said this was only for x64.


English Isn't my first language (Let's bring the grammar nazis), I wrote that because what #1 wrote was misleading.
#22.6 Xenomorph on 31 Jul 2007 - 22:55
Quote - (Azmodan said @ #22.5)
English Isn't my first language (Let's bring the grammar nazis), I wrote that because what #1 wrote was misleading.


what #1 was not misleading. it is correct. the statement he made only applies to the 64-bit version!
(1 reply) #23 PR. on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:19
Be careful with these, after creating a system restore and installing the smaller one I got a BSOD instantly at boot up. I did a repair from the Vista DVD and got it working then was annoyed it didn't use the latest System Restore, so I did and now I'm pretty sure I've killed the install
#23.1 PR. on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:11
I'd now like to retract my last statement...

Problem was down to a failed Toshiba HDD Protection Installation I did a couple of weeks ago but never rebooted for. Just needed to System Restore back to that point and it came back.

Have installed the patches and will see if it helps. I'd like to think this fixes the issue with Readyboost but I bet it won't...
#24 nickels on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:23
hmmm maybe ill wait a week then
#25 SpyCatcher on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:26
Installs and works perfect with x86
#26 usman767 on 30 Jul 2007 - 14:42

To install or not to install??? Thats a question
#27 vetSHoTTa35 on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:02
wow, nicely done MS. The copy system now has improved, it doesn't say "Calculating...." forever, it actually starts with saying, "About 0 seconds remaining" then goes up to match. This is when copying from one partition to the other on my laptop.

It still says "Calculating..." forever still tho when copying to a Windows 2003 Server.
#28 bucko on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:05
Nice I'm hopefully getting Vista as a gift on Wednesday and I'm building my new computer this week.

Think I will wait for the official pack though there might be more improvements by then.
#29 Meowy on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:05
Installed and working great here on two computers. Definately faster.
#30 SkyyPunk on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:15
yay printer driver update!!!!!

That has been one annoying thing for me, I could never connect to my desktops (XP) shared printer...sounds like this will fix it!
(1 reply) #31 gate1975mlm on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:20
O MY GOD!!!

After installing these 2 updates Files tranfers are sooo much faster its not even funny! Its now just as good as Windows XP. Huge improvment.

Is quick that you almost don't even see the calculating the ‘estimated time remaining’ when copying/moving large files!

This was always one of the main things I hated about Vista compared to XP but it now fixed with this update.

So happy with this update!
#31.1 +Brandon Live on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:28
Actually, it's faster than XP
(1 reply) #32 kiddingguy on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:33
How "unofficial" are these two KB's downloads and will there be some adjustments to it the upcoming 2 weeks?
#32.1 M118LR on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:01
These 2 KB's are in Beta from Connect. There is only a small group of people that would have access to them.
(1 reply) #33 AminoSC on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:41
These updates are a MUST install! The file copy problem is FIXED!!!!! Faster than XP now. No joke.
#33.1 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:06
It always was for me -- this was most likely a compatibility problem with some hardware or something.
I was amazed by Vista's improved copy speeds since day 1, so apparently it was a bug for quite a few.
#34 Aeden on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:42
nevermind.
#35 ana04 on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:44
Installed and so far my comp hasn't caught fire yet...
#36 AminoSC on 30 Jul 2007 - 15:55
I'm getting 100 more points on 3DMark06 using 162.22 whql on my 8600GT with these updates!!! I'm AMAZED!!!
#37 DJ Prem on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:31
Sweet, Will wait for it to be released officially before installing.
#38 blackcat77 on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:34
My Logitech wireless mouse was dead when I rebooted after the installation. Unplugged and replugged the USB receiver and it worked again. That's a minor issue, but now I'll see if it's actually done any good.
#39 Izlude on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:37
Nevermind it doesn't show up anymore

------

Other than that, everything feels much better. I'm glad they fixed that file transfer goody. Also overall feel is much smoother. I havn't had the taskbar lock up on me at all. (thinks they fixed more than they listed)

Thank ya MS
(1 reply) #40 burnsflipper on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:48
anyone know if the BSOD when installing on a machine with an ATI X1600 was resolved? because I had to manually upgrade the drivers in between the installation of vista, because the one vista has is outdated
#40.1 Express on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:08
I have the same card but don't experience the crash you mention. Just slipstream the drivers into Vista setup if a driver update fixes your issue.
Look up WAIK if you don't know how to slipstream in Vista.
Michael Kleef has posted some pretty cool video tutorials that will give you a primer on the tools.
#41 +IceDogg on 30 Jul 2007 - 16:54
This one actually works. I've seen many things (including hotfixes) in the vista forums that was suppose to fix the files transferring slow problem, but this one actually works.
#42 NightmarE D on 30 Jul 2007 - 18:23
How much does anyone want to bet that the few whiners above complaining about the legality of this have most likely downloaded this as soon as they saw it, then went on to complain?

If I had Vista on my system right now I'd done have this installed. The only thing I hated about Vista was the file transfer speeds taking forever then I had a stick of RAM die on me. That's the only reason I'm even on XP still.
(3 replies) #43 JonathanMarston on 30 Jul 2007 - 18:32
What does "Improved visual appearance of games with high intensity graphics" mean??
#43.1 jwjw1 on 30 Jul 2007 - 18:55
could mean that microsoft started hiring 6th graders to do the graphics instead of the 2nd graders...lol
#43.2 DigitalE on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:09
Perhaps you get one more frame per second or something
#43.3 bobbba on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:37
I think it's better compatibility with Crossfire and SLI
(2 replies) #44 vetLOC on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:22
Bleh, can't install these in Vista 64. I get a "Installer enountered an error: 0x80070422 - The service cannot be started , either because it is disabled or because it has no devices assoicated with it"

I have no idea how to address that one, sadly google hasn't been much help yet.
#44.1 +Lexcyn on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:35
Is the Windows Update service disabled? Or any other services that the update may need? Not sure if that's the issue or if you've already tried looking at services but eh ...
#44.2 vetLOC on 30 Jul 2007 - 22:48
Quote - (Lexcyn said @ #44.1)
Is the Windows Update service disabled? Or any other services that the update may need? Not sure if that's the issue or if you've already tried looking at services but eh ...


Yeah its weird, I looked through the services and Windows Update was enabled and running, then when I rebooted everything worked ok and I patched :|

But now I can't get a network connection in Vista, heh. I'll have to mess around with things, either that or uninstall the updates I guess.
#45 whitedragon on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:40
Works great here! Copied a 700MB ISO in like 8 seconds from one HDD to another.
A8N32-SLI Deluxe
Athlon64 X2 4400+(skt 939)
2GB Crucial Ballistix DDR500
(1 reply) #46 toadeater on 30 Jul 2007 - 19:50
Only a couple more of these and Vista will finally be usable.
#46.1 phiberoptik on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:08
Quote - (toadeater said @ #46)
Only a couple more of these and Vista will finally be usable.


Been 100% usable here for me, and probably a lot more people on here.. It's that crappy haxor/keygen/l33t/decomplier/hexeditor/hacked drivers POS software you guys install that causes the problems.. same goes for XP.. clean install works fine, it's all the crap that mucks it up.
(4 replies) #47 phiberoptik on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:07
Now if we can just get them to figure out the Window layout bug.... everyone should know what I am talking about.
#47.1 MioTheGreat on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:23
I'm afraid I don't have a clue what you're talking about.
#47.2 phiberoptik on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:36
Quote - (MioTheGreat said @ #47.1)
I'm afraid I don't have a clue what you're talking about.


Maybe I worded it wrong.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=567917

Check that link, then google it.. it's everywhere.. and annoying as hell.

I just want my folders to maintain a "Detailed" view, and I have done "Apply to all" then it just randomly changes them...
#47.3 ZombieFly on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:57
Quote - (phiberoptik said @ #47.2)
Quote - (MioTheGreat said @ #47.1)
I'm afraid I don't have a clue what you're talking about.


Maybe I worded it wrong.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=567917

Check that link, then google it.. it's everywhere.. and annoying as hell.

I just want my folders to maintain a "Detailed" view, and I have done "Apply to all" then it just randomly changes them...


oh yes. THE most annoying bug in vista. set your folder to detail. return days later to have it in massive icon view, with the photo view column headers telling you size and date taken... this happens randomly to any folder, its talked about everywhere on the net.
#47.4 Jugalator on 30 Jul 2007 - 21:11
I agree, I have had it happen even when setting my layout settings, then going to Folder Options and selecting "Use this setting for all folders" with "remember settings for each folder" active. Then it runs well for some time and suddenly some weird folder get huge icons for seemingly no reason at all. I highly doubt there's another third party program that manipulates Vista's folder settings too... The problem usually resolves for some time if you once again pick to restore all settings and then "use for all folders" with your current folder set like you want it -- until it later happens again. :-p

Is it because Vista tries to cache individual folder settings and it runs out of cache space and starts successively reverting them to defaults, even if you told it to just have everything use the same layout? In that case, it should really not use a layout cache at all and only just assume you want everything the same unless you change the layout. The only thing needed to be cached should be the folders that *deviate* from the default you have set.

And don't even get me started on Vista's very stubborn ways of trying to find out what "type" a folder is and hiding columns that it deems is "useless" like... well, file type. :p So you can't sort on that column. You need to add it back. And then that layout bug above bites you in the ass and it drops that column because once in a full moon it decides that folder once again is a photo folder because it had like 3 picture files in it. And then you should no longer be allowed to sort by file types unless you forcefully add back the column, and what's more, it's assumed you have some kind of sight impairment so you need it all in 128x128 size icons. Folders, text docs and all. Gaah!

But I'm not just complaining without being constructive. So I bough a license of Directory Opus. It allows me to configure file layouts to my heart's content and even remembers them. Wow!

Last edited by Jugalator on 30 Jul 2007 - 21:20
#48 gate1975mlm on 30 Jul 2007 - 20:14
layout bug????????????

More info please.
(2 replies) #49 jjthenovice on 30 Jul 2007 - 21:38
I've downloaded the 32 bit ver. Do I need to rename it (the extention)? When I double click on it, the windows doesn't recognize it.
#49.1 SIE on 30 Jul 2007 - 21:48
You need to extract it first, get 7zip.

http://www.7-zip.org/download.html
#49.2 vetSHoTTa35 on 30 Jul 2007 - 22:47
either the above or WinRAR will open it and extract it like a zip file.
(2 replies) #50 roma0803 on 30 Jul 2007 - 21:47
Weird. After installing I'm unable to move or copy directories, I can only move the files within.....
#50.1 justrezzo on 31 Jul 2007 - 03:09
I have the same problem after install this hotfixes.

- Problems with Move files/folders (doesn't work)


- Problems with Rename files/folders (doesn't work)


#50.2 obsolete_power on 01 Aug 2007 - 03:57
Because you people are sick or something because you can't seem to wait for an official release. Install beta software and you should expect problems. That is why it is BETA!
#51 Pas on 30 Jul 2007 - 21:58
well, after installing and running everything for a few hours, i shut the system down when i left the house. after returning home, i turned the system on to find out that my installation of vista is not genuine according to microsoft. according to ms, i had a counterfeit copy of vista ultimate 64 installed on my machine, which is not true. after restoring my machine to a point earlier than the installation fo these two updates, everything is kosher again.
#52 +Orien on 30 Jul 2007 - 22:46
Installed. Works perfectly.
#53 +ozzieXP on 31 Jul 2007 - 00:08
finally it doesnt take forever to transfer files
#54 LEXX911 on 31 Jul 2007 - 00:32
I have no problem with the files transfering with my Vista 64. After installing the Vista Performance and Reliability Pack Unofficial Release, I see no changes of improvement.
(1 reply) #55 SixofTen on 31 Jul 2007 - 04:24
Download links broken
#55.1 h|tcher on 31 Jul 2007 - 09:18
Check this link for downloads:

Link

(1 reply) #56 Crucify on 31 Jul 2007 - 04:34
Yeh, looks as if some narc who thinks not everyone should have this pack, has reported the links.
Any mirrors?
#56.1 M118LR on 31 Jul 2007 - 06:01
These Vista Hotfixes are still Beta and need to be fully tested by MSFT, which is why they have not yet been released for download. They still may need to be tweeked some more before release.
#57 Tikitiki on 31 Jul 2007 - 04:58
It's probably on other torrent sites such as demonoid.com (Vista.Performance.And.Reliability.Pack.Unofficial-Roger525)
#58 vna on 31 Jul 2007 - 13:14
Hi!
I know this fixes issues with videos, video drivers, but does it fix problems with soundcards, like Creative's Audigy cards?
One more question: I'm using a Genius Netscroll+ Superior with Genius ioCentre but after a couple of hours it get's me a nice BSOD, if it's turned off everything works fine except the extra buttons on my mouse. Any changes on compatibility to this?

Thanks!
(3 replies) #59 temp2 on 31 Jul 2007 - 14:04
While we're sharing copyright data, Neowin, people are going to need a copy of Vista to apply these updated to, so here's one:
http://isokunt.com/torrent_details/19983788/vista

Hypocrites.
#59.1 Xtreme2damax on 31 Jul 2007 - 14:20
Quote - (temp2 said @ #59)
While we're sharing copyright data, Neowin, people are going to need a copy of Vista to apply these updated to, so here's one:
http://isokunt.com/torrent_details/19983788/vista

Hypocrites.


I fail to see your point, vista is a commercial operating system therefore illegal to distribute as part of the EULA. These updates are extremely likely to be part of a "Free" Update and not commercial therefore completely legal to distribute regardless if in the testing stages.

Yeah Micro$oft can try to do something about it, but it is unlikely that they'll get anywhere due to someone can argue they are going to be released as a free update anyways.

Piracy only affects and applies to commercial software (Paid Software), and not things like free updates and hotfixes. The only way this would be illegal is if someone reversed engineered and modified the code.

I've been keeping close tabs on stuff like this, therefore most if not all of what I said above is true (Look up copyright laws, licensing terms).

The EULA only is there and exists to protect Commercial software from being distributed illegally and other tidbits, not to prevent a free update or hotfix from being distributed.

Sir, I'll laugh my ass off if you get banned for posting that *idiot*. :rofl:
#59.2 SixofTen on 31 Jul 2007 - 16:17
Quote - (temp2 said @ #59)
While we're sharing copyright data, Neowin, people are going to need a copy of Vista to apply these updated to, so here's one:
http://isokunt.com/torrent_details/19983788/vista

Hypocrites.

You are pathetic
#59.3 NightmarE D on 31 Jul 2007 - 18:00
You made no point at all with that post and I agree that you should be banned for posting that link. If you're not banned then that would be BS.

You people whining over this are comparing a full OS to a couple hotfixes that fix a lot of problems.

The people that reported the links are just trying to kiss some Microsoft butt, yet some turn around and post links to torrents of Vista itself. How pathetic and immature is that?

How much anyone want to bet that whoever reported the links is in the Microsoft beta newsgroups tying to brag about it to try gaining access to other betas? I saw people doing that with Vista and it was pathetic.

There's one person on this page that's complaining that I know for a fact uploads Microsoft betas to Demonoid. Maybe I should stop ignoring that and go report them.

I didn't even download these hotfixes and still find it annoying that people whined over them being released.
#60 obsolete_power on 31 Jul 2007 - 16:18
People, just wait for the official releases of these packs....
#61 LEXX911 on 31 Jul 2007 - 17:47
These patches really fixes the Nvidia driver. No more choppiness and jerkiness in games. Running much smoother now.
#62 kev_gordon on 31 Jul 2007 - 22:56
Holy crap! These hotfixes have made a difference. Copying is a joy now!
(5 replies) #63 Tom275 on 31 Jul 2007 - 23:10
Alright, these self-righteous copyright enforcers are pretty annoying. I felt compelled to comment even though this thread it probably done.

People throw the word "illegal" around a lot, but in order for the court to actually hear a case, it must be demonstrated that someone actually suffered harm as a result of some sort of "illegal" activity. The bad thing that happened has a lot to do with how the court views the original action.

I doubt MS will take any action whatsoever about these. If they did, what would their damages be? I can just see it, in 2009 when the trial finally starts "Excuse me your Honour, this website posted our intellectual property for 14 days. We subsequently released it to the public for free. We've never charged for it. In fact, we're contractually bound to provide these hotfixes as part of the ongoing obligation to provide security and performance patches."

Give me a break.

#63.1 XY GT on 01 Aug 2007 - 11:33
Just to let you know, they have taken action.

They are asking anyone hosting a copy to take it off (usually by contacting their webhost). If they contact your webhost they are asking for suspension of your account.
#63.2 Poof on 01 Aug 2007 - 17:30
One of the reasons why Microsoft doesn't want the patches on public websites, is that they're under NDA. Further, there may be changes to the patch from the time it was 'leaked' to the time it went public. And, if that patch had some sort of failure that was later exploited... It'd be on Microsoft's hands.

#63.3 Xtreme2damax on 02 Aug 2007 - 00:35
Quote - (XY GT said @ #63.1)
Just to let you know, they have taken action.

They are asking anyone hosting a copy to take it off (usually by contacting their webhost). If they contact your webhost they are asking for suspension of your account.


Sure

Yeah Microsoft can ask nicely in hopes whoever will remove them, but legally they don't have a leg to stand on.

What, are they going to say it's piracy? Sorry Piracy only applies to the circumvention and distribution of commercial software/games/movies/music, and not free updates or hotfixes. It doesn't matter if it's still in development, there is technically nothing that can be done.

Microsoft could try to take you to court or shut the website down, good luck with that. The case would be tossed out so fast by the judge as soon as it was mentioned these are going to be released freely anyways as part of an update.

Now if they were going to charge for them, then yes they would legally be able to do something about it. But I've never knew Microsoft to ever charge for an Update, Hotfix, Service Pack or patch, they're not Apple thank goodness.

Maybe try reading my last post, it'll explain that they technically can't do anything about it. I keep close tabs on anti-piracy laws, licensing terms and such, and no where does it mention anything about the prevention of "free" hotfixes or updates from being distributed, only commercial products.

Also, this supposed update didn't seem to do anything. I installed it, had no gain in any kind of performance, folder/file copy speed is still the same. Those of you saying it worked are full of it or M$ placebo effect is working on you, "Omg this update says it increases performance, so it must and it does (When in fact it doesn't do anything).

I installed it and did not get the slightest improvement in performance at all. Games are still having the same problems, Aero still sluggish, when it shouldn't be, folder/file copy speed still the same as before, no improvement in game performance or compatibility.

The things it claims it addresses doesn't seem to work or do what it's intended to do.

#63.4 7Dash8 on 02 Aug 2007 - 05:02
Copyright means the person who owns a piece of work has the right to determine how it is distributed. It is illegal to distribute something under copyright without the author's permission. Therefore it is illegal to distribute a patch or hotfix (a piece of code under copyright by Microsoft) without their permission - end of story.

While the patch may not physically harm a computer, it can harm a company's reputation if there are problems with it, which is why most companies act to prevent private betas being leaked to the public.
#63.5 Anne-O-Nimus on 20 Aug 2007 - 11:30
Quote - (7Dash8 said @ #5)
Copyright means the person who owns a piece of work has the right to determine how it is distributed. It is illegal to distribute something under copyright without the author's permission. Therefore it is illegal to distribute a patch or hotfix (a piece of code under copyright by Microsoft) without their permission - end of story.

While the patch may not physically harm a computer, it can harm a company's reputation if there are problems with it, which is why most companies act to prevent private betas being leaked to the public.


Yes, this is how I understand the law to be interpreted. So the $64,000 question is, "Has anyone asked for and received Microsoft permission to redistribute their windows update files?"

I'd sure like to find a legal precedent to persuade my ISP to host the AutoPatcher files.

It seems inconsistent/unreasonable for Microsoft to make the individual update files available for end users to freely download from the Windows Update Catalog and yet not permit an ISP to host what is essentially a tarball of the same redistributable files.
(1 reply) #64 +Orien on 31 Jul 2007 - 23:43
What happens when Microsoft releases the official versions of these hotfixes if you already installed these beta hotfixes? Will it overwrite the beta ones?
#64.1 obsolete_power on 01 Aug 2007 - 17:44
You'd have to uninstall the beta ones and re-install the official releases
#65 jesseinsf on 31 Jul 2007 - 23:51
I installed the updates and everything works great....One thing I think everyone should keep in mind is that, just like going from OS9 to OSX, you have to have software and drivers that are built for the specific OS. If you don't do this the there is no telling what will go wrong. Vista (for me) is fun to use...I could never go back to XP. One reason why my copy of Vista worked great after these patches is because everything I installed on my computer is either built for Vista or it is stated that it works for Vista. There are a few helpful tools that Microsoft made to test the Vista compatibility of your system. One is before you install Vista (assuming you have XP currently installed). And that can be found here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...;displaylang=en

The other is when vista is already installed. You can find an option in the safe mode boot menu. It's a choice that will test your memory to see if Vista's improved memory manager will function properly.

Like I heard earlier...someone’s computer kept freezing up....Here is a few steps you can do to diagnose the problem. First: Take out and/or unplug any peripherals (Cameras, Printers, USB Hubs, Scanners, iPods, Zunes and anything you can take out of the PCI slots like Nic cards, USB cards and SCSI cards) Use a PS2 keyboard and mouse.
Second: Install Vista, and then perform a Vista memory test. If everything works, you set.
Now install all hardware one-by-one (Reboot after each install). If something goes wrong after installing something then there is your problem. Last is to do the same with your software (make sure the software is Vista written or has the works with Vista "Logo". Hopefully this helps
(2 replies) #66 ripkord on 02 Aug 2007 - 14:26
Hmm, when I install these updates my network no longer works, says theres a driver confict with the network adapter (590 series nvida onboard jobby) (yes i installed the x64 verison)

anyone else get this problem?

might download the latest driver and install that after the hotfixes
#66.1 jesseinsf on 02 Aug 2007 - 18:46
Quote - (ripkord said @ #66)
Hmm, when I install these updates my network no longer works, says theres a driver confict with the network adapter (590 series nvida onboard jobby) (yes i installed the x64 verison)

anyone else get this problem?

might download the latest driver and install that after the hotfixes


Try disabling the driver and then wait a moment. then re-enable it:-)

Hope that works
#66.2 ripkord on 02 Aug 2007 - 20:50
Quote - (jesseinsf said @ #66.1)
Quote - (ripkord said @ #66)
Hmm, when I install these updates my network no longer works, says theres a driver confict with the network adapter (590 series nvida onboard jobby) (yes i installed the x64 verison)

anyone else get this problem?

might download the latest driver and install that after the hotfixes


Try disabling the driver and then wait a moment. then re-enable it:-)

Hope that works


Thanks for the tip, didnt work however, might just have to wait for the official ones then
#67 ripkord on 02 Aug 2007 - 14:30
oops i probaly should have rebooted in between updates eh - doh wuill try that
#68 ripkord on 02 Aug 2007 - 14:54
hmm neither worked
(2 replies) #69 +MchWalte on 02 Aug 2007 - 21:40
#69.1 crisgen on 06 Aug 2007 - 14:01
Sorry for my english, I'm Italian and use a translator.
I've downloaded the pack from that link (rapidshare) but is this the pack for vista 64 or 32bit?
I've Vista 32bit so I need x86 version.
Thx
#69.2 crisgen on 06 Aug 2007 - 14:26
I've seen better....were for x86 so I've installed and all works great.
Thx...finally Vista run faster
#70 LEXX911 on 08 Aug 2007 - 00:03
How come we still seeing 6.0, Build 6000 instead it should be 6001 with this leak version?

http://winbeta.org/comments.php?id=9012&catid=1
#72 missa on 07 Oct 2009 - 18:08
The information you posted about <a href="http://www.eiluxury.com"> louis vuitton</a> is so useful, I am expecting for your next post.
Nice articles, but I am not clear about the point you mentioned about how to distinguish fake and real <a href="http://www.eiluxury.com">louis vuitton online shop</a>.
You seem to be professional about louis vuitton, can you advise where to buy real louis vuitton sale?
I'd love to discuss discount louis vuitton, but I am not sure if you really have one.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)