Microsoft has delivered a beta of Vista Service Pack 2 to select hardware and software partners according to sources close to Microsoft.Last week the company put a place holder online for information about Windows Server 2008 Service Pack 2 and Windows Vista Service Pack 2. In it Microsoft acknowledges the existence of the beta and claims "No formal product support is available from Microsoft for this beta product".
According to All about Microsoft writer Mary Jo Foley the company will deliver SP2 before the highly anticipated Windows 7 release rumoured in the second half of next year.
It is widely expected that Hyper-V will be included with Vista SP2 alongside the usual OS improvements and hot fixes that a service pack brings.
Microsoft could reveal further information about Vista SP2 at the company's professional developers conference (PDC) next month.
I think that should be the main point to SP2. Speed, Speed, Speed.
Blow out the competition. My 64 bit vista should be faster than lightning compared to XP64bit. I hope they improve the speeds of vista machines everywhere.
I think that should be the main point to SP2. Speed, Speed, Speed.
Blow out the competition. My 64 bit vista should be faster than lightning compared to XP64bit. I hope they improve the speeds of vista machines everywhere.
I have no idea how faster it can be... 1 sec to load word/excel/outlook.
Folders with thousands of photos already thumbnailed in database load in 2 seconds, inbdex search is instant.
No operation system can accelerate disk loading or things like that.
Everything Vista gets a chance to cache, index, etc lodas very fast.
Great!
It will be released in first quarter 2010, read the news bro! vista was the exception rather then the rule...
Troll..
In the West the difference between 2006 and 2001 is only 5 years. Secondly Microsoft released:
Windows XP in 2001
Windows XP SP2 in 2003
Windows Vista in 2006.
SP2 was an exception and they invested time and money in it as much as they invest in a new OS. Back in that time it was a discussion if Microsoft should have released it as a new OS or not.
In the West the difference between 2006 and 2001 is only 5 years. Secondly Microsoft released:
Windows XP in 2001
Windows XP SP2 in 2003
Windows Vista in 2006.
SP2 was an exception and they invested time and money in it as much as they invest in a new OS. Back in that time it was a discussion if Microsoft should have released it as a new OS or not.
Windows XP was released August 2004.
In the West the difference between 2006 and 2001 is only 5 years. Secondly Microsoft released:
Windows XP in 2001
Windows XP SP2 in 2003
Windows Vista in 2006.
SP2 was an exception and they invested time and money in it as much as they invest in a new OS. Back in that time it was a discussion if Microsoft should have released it as a new OS or not.
Windows XP was released August 2004.
u mean xp sp2.
anyway, xp was released october 2001 and vista was released 30 jan 2007.
Yeah, cause Windows 7 with it's hundreds of new features and zero patches is going to run sooo much quicker.
Yeah, cause Windows 7 with it's hundreds of new features and zero patches is going to run sooo much quicker.
What are these hundreds of new features? You do know they've stripped out a whole bunch of programs already (Movie maker, Windows Mail, Windows Messenger, Photo Gallery, off the top of my head) so it's looking like it will be a much lighter install than Vista. As for patches, if it's based off Vista it will be just as up to date, actually more, so why is that an issue? I don't think it's too much to expect that they can optimize the Vista code base and produce a faster OS.
Oh there will be lots of new features - hopefully we'll have a better idea after PDC.
Oh there will be lots of new features - hopefully we'll have a better idea after PDC.
If you can't run Vista now, You will not be able to run Win7. Hardware specs do not go backwards. Currently Win7 is not a huge change from Vista.
To Hyper-V, I doubt MS would release that to all Vista owners, as that would really annoy the Ultimate users. Most likely Hyper-V will be released as an Ultimate Extra, that is if MS even plan to give Vista Hyper-V which I have my doubts.
That'd be great - i'd love to see proper freesat support for mine
well-backed reliable source of news ...
why do you keep repeating incorrect information?
read the article
Troll (again).. Change the record dear - nobody's listening to your unfounded rubbish.
Last edited by Xerxes on 16 Oct 2008 - 06:47
having tried server 2008 alongside my vista x64 install, i can say that turning server 2008 back to vista DOES result in a faster OS. However, the speed benefit is outweighed by the fact that you have to keep adjusting things and installers etc detect it's a server OS, meaning you're constantly looking for hacks and fixes to install software. Anyway, it's definately not "all in their heads" as you put it, maybe you should try it yourself before smacking your own face?
Nobody liked XP when it came out. Everyone hated it just like they hate vista. Problems with compatibility issues, lack of good drivers. Not able to do 16 bit anymore. It will be the same every time. People are afraid of change and Microsoft knows that. That's why they are basing it off of vista.
Windows XP 32-bit versions can run 16 bit applications through Compatibility mode and sometimes without. Microsoft didn't remove the 16-bit subsystem until the release of Windows XP Professional x64, course, there was not 16 bit support in Windows XP for Itanium systems to begin with.
All my folders now save their views correctly.
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.