Microsoft is looking to release the Release Candidate (RC) test build of Windows Vista Service Pack (SP) 1 to selected testers the week of December 1, according to sources close to the company.
Microsoft’s plan is to expand the SP1 RC test to the general public by making the build available to any interested parties in the second week of December, sources said. Microsoft is currently testing the escrow of the SP1 RC build internally. The build being tested internally is build number 17051, sources said.
Microsoft has said it is planning to deliver the final SP1 code in the first quarter of 2008. Microsoft made a preview build of the Vista SP1 RC available to 15,000 pre-selected testers on November 14.
View: Full Article @ ZDNet Blogs
Microsoft’s plan is to expand the SP1 RC test to the general public by making the build available to any interested parties in the second week of December, sources said. Microsoft is currently testing the escrow of the SP1 RC build internally. The build being tested internally is build number 17051, sources said.
Microsoft has said it is planning to deliver the final SP1 code in the first quarter of 2008. Microsoft made a preview build of the Vista SP1 RC available to 15,000 pre-selected testers on November 14.
View: Full Article @ ZDNet Blogs
this better be a pretty beefy fix up
Most people have no problems with vista.
The ones that do are, are because of crappy drivers or applications they haven't updated.. not the fault of MS.
And the others saying it sucks or has problems, have never even tried it.. but like to be part of some group.
And the others saying it sucks or has problems, have never even tried it.. but like to be part of some group.
Interesting -- you seem to have covered all bases in that reply. So you're essentially saying that there are no problems with Vista? Boy, do MS have their priorities wrong, in that case.
And the others saying it sucks or has problems, have never even tried it.. but like to be part of some group.
Interesting -- you seem to have covered all bases in that reply. So you're essentially saying that there are no problems with Vista? Boy, do MS have their priorities wrong, in that case.
+1
And I tried the latest SP1 build and it was pure ****. Control Panel disappeared, programs stopped working, etc etc. Fortunately I could go back to a restore point, but it still left a couple of things wonky and needed a couple of reinstalls of updates, etc to get it back to the way it was before. Eeesh.
Most people have no problems with vista.
The ones that do are, are because of crappy drivers or applications they haven't updated.. not the fault of MS.
And the others saying it sucks or has problems, have never even tried it.. but like to be part of some group.
The people that deny problems on Vista are just as bad as those who exaggerate problems on Vista.
Is Vista a disaster? No.
Does it have problems that should never have been problems if released right? Yes.
Just my two cents.
And I tried the latest SP1 build and it was pure ****. Control Panel disappeared, programs stopped working, etc etc. Fortunately I could go back to a restore point, but it still left a couple of things wonky and needed a couple of reinstalls of updates, etc to get it back to the way it was before. Eeesh.
you installed SP1 on your main.. well you got what you deserved
The Crysis speed improvement sounds good, do you mean this is improvements over the "performance pack" MS released? I'm pretty reluctant to try Microsoft beta software, considering how "in progress" their "final" versions generally are. Those who have, is installing for example the RC1 and then installing the final version over it painless or does it cause some random problems? Are SP1 builds even available as anything but full ISOs of the OS?
Actually, MS did admit failings over UAC and the number of prompts, but couldn't cut them down due to how it was architectured. They will be dealing with it, but it will require a lot of work, more than for an early Service Pack.
The Crysis speed improvement sounds good, do you mean this is improvements over the "performance pack" MS released? I'm pretty reluctant to try Microsoft beta software, considering how "in progress" their "final" versions generally are. Those who have, is installing for example the RC1 and then installing the final version over it painless or does it cause some random problems? Are SP1 builds even available as anything but full ISOs of the OS?
The whole reason I do install beta builds like that, is because of the problems its gonna most likely cause later, but I'll be looking forward to it when it comes out as a final.
Actually, MS did admit failings over UAC and the number of prompts, but couldn't cut them down due to how it was architectured. They will be dealing with it, but it will require a lot of work, more than for an early Service Pack.
If you keep getting too many prompts it's because you are probably working on the wrong folder. anyway, if you set the ownership of the folder to your account, you won't get prompted anymore...
Nobody cares about XP most businesses are still using 2000 Pro.
Nobody cares about XP most businesses are still using 2000 Pro.
grunger106, don't bother replying to such posts, just read and move on, they will never LISTEN.
- Everything feels a lot snappier
- It fixed a BSDO that I used to have all the time with 4gb (even with specific hotfixes made just for that)
- Boot time is greatly decreased (one of the reasons was that my SWAP file is on a separate HD, in RTM it'd take a while for the HD to start working) now it's instant.
- Less HD thrashing: for some reason even after 1 year of use at night I couldn't sleep with my PC on because my 3 hard drives were constantly spinning like crazy, after installing SP1 I can finally leave it on
- Network Transfers and copying files from different volumes and partitions are much faster (even faster than when using those Performance and Reliability updates that they released a while ago)
- Various other little kinks have been worked out
Don't emphasize those ridiculous benchmarks comparing pre-sp1 and post sp-1 and some even comparing XP SP3. PFFFFFF! It didn't take me some bar graphs posted on "OMFG Vista sux" websites to feel a real-world (and not synthetic) difference
For businesses it's a mixed bag, mainly determined by how much money the business is willing to spend on their OS and what their OS needs are. Frankly, I don't see many businesses switching to Vista any time soon. Heck, most of the ones I deal with are still running Win2K. They just don't see any compelling reason to switch to Vista.
For me, I'm happy with XP and I'll wait for Vista to mature before I jump on board.
"For gamers Win2k remains the OS of choice, mainly becasue it runs their games faster than XP does and DX 9 still isn't a compelling enough reason to switch.. yet. (Once we see games coded only for DX 9... games that can't run under DX 8, then this will change. Not before.)
For businesses it's a mixed bag, mainly determined by how much money the business is willing to spend on their OS and what their OS needs are. Frankly, I don't see many businesses switching to XP any time soon. Heck, most of the ones I deal with are still running Win98. They just don't see any compelling reason to switch to XP.
For me, I'm happy with Win2k and I'll wait for XP to mature before I jump on board."
It's really stupid to see the same crap being said over and over again with every new release...
"For gamers Win2k remains the OS of choice, mainly becasue it runs their games faster than XP does and DX 9 still isn't a compelling enough reason to switch.. yet. (Once we see games coded only for DX 9... games that can't run under DX 8, then this will change. Not before.)
For businesses it's a mixed bag, mainly determined by how much money the business is willing to spend on their OS and what their OS needs are. Frankly, I don't see many businesses switching to XP any time soon. Heck, most of the ones I deal with are still running Win98. They just don't see any compelling reason to switch to XP.
For me, I'm happy with Win2k and I'll wait for XP to mature before I jump on board."
It's really stupid to see the same crap being said over and over again with every new release...
Actually, you're wrong. In fact, Windows 98 is much superior to that bloated crap called 2k.
For gamers Win98 remains the OS of choice, mainly becasue it runs their games faster than 2K does and DX 9 still isn't a compelling enough reason to switch.. yet. (Once we see games coded only for DX 9... games that can't run under DX 8, then this will change. Not before.)
For businesses it's a mixed bag, mainly determined by how much money the business is willing to spend on their OS and what their OS needs are. Frankly, I don't see many businesses switching to 2k any time soon. Heck, most of the ones I deal with are still running Win95. They just don't see any compelling reason to switch to 2k.
For me, I'm happy with Win98 and I'll wait for 2k to mature before I jump on board.
What's really stupid is that every Microsoft OS release is infested with bugs, no matter how much MS says they have improved. Vista is the same run-around all over again. Only now MS has made it even more bureaucratic with all this activation nonsense and poorly-designed security measures (UAC and Vista's hardware DRM).
Screw MS, we're finally starting to have true alternatives to their mediocre junk and I'll be glad to see MS taken down a few notches. Maybe that will encourage MS to create even a moderately better product. I doubt they're capable of it, unless they copy someone again.
Well that's a rather stupid point really isn't it? You either want people to comment on new releases or you don't?
If the truth is that the OS needs to mature (which it does by MS admission no less) then it's the truth. It doesn't always have to be an insult
just remember people that this are beta releases on not final versions of code.
my two cents.
ps: i'm seing all the bashing when they publish RC1...
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.