Vista Performance and Reliability Pack Unofficial Release

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

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

YouTube to use copyright filter

Next Story

Top US TV Pilots Leaked Online

155 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

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.

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

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

ripkord said,
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

jesseinsf said,

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

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

What happens when Microsoft releases the official versions of these hotfixes if you already installed these beta hotfixes? Will it overwrite the beta ones?

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.

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.

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.

XY GT said,
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.

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.

7Dash8 said,
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.

These patches really fixes the Nvidia driver. No more choppiness and jerkiness in games. Running much smoother now.

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!

It's probably on other torrent sites such as demonoid.com (Vista.Performance.And.Reliability.Pack.Unofficial-Roger525)

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.

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.

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.

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)

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!

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.

phiberoptik said,

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.

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. 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!

toadeater said,
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.

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

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.

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 ... :P

Lexcyn said,
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 ... :P

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Nevermind it doesn't show up anymore :P

------

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

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.

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.

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!

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!

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.

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.

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

I'd now like to retract my last statement... :redface:

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...

Download: Vista Compatibility and Reliability Pack for x64 or x86 version

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

#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

Azmodan said,
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.

Xenomorph said,

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.

Azmodan said,
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!

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?

Flint2 said,
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.

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.

Express said,
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...

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

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

Azmodan said,
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.

ZombieFly said,
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)

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...

HeartsOfWar said,
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

Azmodan said,

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.

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.

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.

jesseinsf said,
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...

HeartsOfWar said,
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.

Azmodan said,

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.

jesseinsf said,
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? :worried:

jesseinsf said,
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?

rm20010 said,

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...

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.

rm20010 said,
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.

jesseinsf said,
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.

Azmodan said,

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.

jesseinsf said,

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?

ZombieFly said,

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.

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!

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.

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 :P

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.

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.

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.

MrCobra said,
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 :P

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.

So what is this about driver signing in vista 64?
If we install both these updates, we can't use peerguardian?

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.

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.

MioTheGreat said,

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?

InsaneNutter said,
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 box) 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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

randomnut said,
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!!

stgeorge said,
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.

cork1958 said,

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.

cork1958 said,
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).

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.

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)"