Microsoft have made available build v6002-16497 of Service Pack 2 for both Windows Vista and Server 2008 to testers late last night. The bits show a compile date of October 17th and weigh in on average around the 3 Gigabyte mark.Early reports show that the build has a smaller memory footprint, you can find more discussion here on our forums, we'll update this post when more information becomes available.
So far, x86 & x64 versions of English, German, Japanese, Spanish and French language have been made available for testing. If you were lucky enough to be selected, head on over to Microsoft Connect to pick up your flavor of the test build.
Link: Microsoft Connect (Registration required)For people without a Connect account, you can register here with your Windows Live ID (required) for consideration to test current and future products on offer from Microsoft.
Just want to check if this helps with performance at all. Should I be worried about installing this beta (ability to uninstall/update)?
Edit: OK just checked. 3 version for x86, 3 versions for x86-64. All between 2.3GB and 2.6GB. Also, I see no reason to believe these are streamlined. Seems like it's just one hell of a service pack?
Last edited by Sacha on 30 Oct 2008 - 10:14
Correction: There is a standalone updater, but it involves downloading an ISO then either burning it to get to the installer, or using an ISO drive mounting tool.
Last edited by TCLN Ryster on 30 Oct 2008 - 18:55
And if you look at the time that I posted, you'll see I posted that before anyone actually confirmed it
your opinion obviously doesn't matter to MS
Still, I know some of my beta tester buddies for Vista and SP1 are not in this yet. Dunno if they were just overlooked, or wether Microsoft have shaken up the list a bit.
Was wondering the same
im really hyped for it
There should be a SP every year or 1 1/2 years imo.
SP1 didn't do a dang thing except hog space!!
Vista is STILL a POS!!
But, yeah, good to see MS try and fix their crap as quickly as possible, and it probably WILL take a 3gb SP to do it!!
LOL
Seriously though, RealFduch is right. Theres nothing wrong with Vista. Anyone saying otherwise is just spreading fud, or is trying to run it on a peice of tin thats as old as Windows XP is. If you try to run Windows XP on a machine that was low to average spec when Windows 98 was released, it will have trouble too!!
- Driver issues you say? Nothing to do with Vista... go harrass the hardware makers.
- Eats too much memory you say? That just shows your ignorance. Vista just makes use of unused memory to cache software so they load quicker. It releases the memory if it becomes needed.
- Its slower than XP you say? Of course it is on the same hardware!. Just as XP was slower than Windows 98 and Windows 2000 on the same hardware. On higher spec hardware, the difference between XP and Vista in terms of speed is negligable now.
Last edited by TCLN Ryster on 30 Oct 2008 - 19:09
Seriously though, RealFduch is right. Theres nothing wrong with Vista. Anyone saying otherwise is just spreading fud, or is trying to run it on a peice of tin thats as old as Windows XP is. If you try to run Windows XP on a machine that was low to average spec when Windows 98 was released, it will have trouble too!!
- Driver issues you say? Nothing to do with Vista... go harrass the hardware makers.
- Eats too much memory you say? That just shows your ignorance. Vista just makes use of unused memory to cache software so they load quicker. It releases the memory if it becomes needed.
- Its slower than XP you say? Of course it is on the same hardware!. Just as XP was slower than Windows 98 and Windows 2000 on the same hardware. On higher spec hardware, the difference between XP and Vista in terms of speed is negligable now.
Just look at the latest releases of Linux - speed is going backwards.
Mac OS X? ever try 10.0 on that current generation of hardware? good luck with that!
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.