Recommended Posts

Hi,

I hadn't touched Vista since Windows 7 came out but I've recently done a fresh install for someone (Vista SP2). Everything went okay, until I tried to run Windows Update, which just outright refuses to find updates no matter what I try. 

Upon first boot I opened windows update, "Windows update needs to update", okay... that works fine, it updates the Windows Update Agent from 7.6.7600.226 to the latest 7.6.7600.256. However, when you actually scan for updates after doing this it just sits at "checking for updates..." for hours with update service taking 100% of one core. 

I've tried manually updating the Windows Agent, running the Microsoft Windows update 'fixit' thing, stopping/starting the service, and doing a second fresh install, but nothing made any difference.

I've tested the hardware (HDD, Memory) and there were no faults. Does anyone have any ideas on how to fix it? Thanks in advance.

See if the following is working:

a. Click on Start, click Run, type services.msc in the Open text box, and then click OK.
b. Locate Windows Update.
c. Right click on the service and select Properties.
d. In Start-up type, select Enable.
e. Click Start under Service status.
f. Click OK.
g. Repeat the steps “c to f” for the following services also: 
Background Intelligent Transfer Service
Cryptographic Services

 

 Troubleshoot problems with installing updates (FixIt).  FixIt usually "fixes it".  Now the update process can take a long time searching for updates since it is a fresh install.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-vista/Troubleshoot-problems-with-installing-updates

You can also take a look at this article which may help.  http://www.wintips.org/windows-update-cannot-check-for-updates-windows-8-7-or-vista-solved/

or..

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2700567/

 

 

Thanks for the reply, all the services are already running and I had previously tried the fixit script(s) with no luck, I've left it "checking for updates..." for hours. 

It's not actually giving any error messages like in the 1st link you provided, it just gets stuck on "checking for updates...". I tried a lot of the stuff in the links anyway but still nothing. 

Almost tempted to just install Windows 7 with a spare license I have because I've wasted hours trying to get this working.

Edited by ZakO

I did a fresh install of Windows 7 SP1... and that won't update either :huh:, same thing, stuck on "Checking for updates..." for the last 2 hours. I'm confused. 

The HDD has no bad sectors, memtest reports no memory errors, the network works fine (~80/20mbps), everything else installs/works on the laptop perfectly fine, but WIndows update won't work :wacko:. Any other ideas?

Here's the WindowsUpdate.log dump:

http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=7SUsKjSh

There seems to be a few errors, but searching about them didn't really find much.

 

Edit: Yeah, I tried that fixit.

Edited by ZakO

I recently experienced a similar issue with a fresh installation of Windows Vista SP2. I tried the fix-it tool, updated to the latest version of the Windows Update Agent, ran sfc /scannow from an elevated command prompt, but none of these things solved the issue that I had in that I was stuck on "checking for updates..." Ultimately I just decided to restart and wait for all of the updates (177!) to appear.

Have you tried CheckSUR? I should note that it did not work for me when I had issues (it also hung), so perhaps you should try to wait for the "checking for updates..." message to finish and only use CheckSUR as a last resort? As I said, my update process unfortunately required patience, so my advice would be to wait it out if none of the listed suggestions work for you. Perhaps this could be done overnight or something.

I'm going to ask a really stupid question because I've had this happen before, but is the time and date set correctly?

I've fresh installed Win 7 before and it refused to install updates due to the date and time being out of sync.
I imagine you have that covered, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to ask. :)

As for the checking for updates, for me it sits there A LONG TIME. Last time I checked for updates I had it sit there for an hour.. Finally it came back with 180 updates. Just walk away it will eventually finish.

I recently did a clean install of windows server 2008 r2 and had a similar problem, stuck at "Checking for updates.." for HOURS at 100% CPU and RAM (it only had 2GB though). I just left it alone and I think it eventually prompted me to install the ~110 updates or so after 4-6 hours.

Yea, I would just give it time.  Fresh installs of Vista/7 can take awhile to come back with updates.  Forgot (and haven't tried) that Dot Net Frame Work ... though I did find it interesting when it was posted.

Thanks for all the replies, I'll leave it "checking for updates..." overnight and see if anything has happened by morning. I had previously left it for 3 hours and nothing happened, but perhaps it just needed even longer :/.

Have you tried CheckSUR? I should note that it did not work for me when I had issues (it also hung), but YMMV. As I said, the update process unfortunately required patience, so my advice would be to wait it out of none of the listed suggestions work for you. Perhaps this could be done overnight or something?

I did try CheckSUR on the Vista install, but not on the 7 install (which exhibits the same problem on the laptop). I'll try this on the 7 install if nothing has happened by morning.

I'm going to ask a really stupid question because I've had this happen before, but is the time and date set correctly?

I've fresh installed Win 7 before and it refused to install updates due to the date and time being out of sync.
I imagine you have that covered, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to ask. :)

Yeah, the time is set correctly. I've actually had that problem in the past too so it was one of the first things I checked.

Okay, I left it overnight and after nearly 6 hours it finally decided to display a list of updates. That's crazy, what could Windows Update possibly be doing that it can take 6+ hours to display a list of ~150 required updates, and not even show any useful visual feedback on a task that can potentially take that long. 

Thanks for the advice everyone, without it I would probably still be testing things thinking Windows Update was broken, rather than it just being a POS :p

it might have something to do with https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1270618-level3-suffering-major-outages-effects-are-felt-worldwide/#comment-597004616 <-- this

I'm not saying it does, but the problem you were experiencing might not be your hardware

 

also have you tried deleting everything that is deletable from C.Windows>software distribution>download?

  • 8 months later...

I have the same problem since I updated to Vista SP2. Windows Update has been running for almost 24 hours and still nothing <sigh>. I've done all the aforementioned things, but to no avail. It also says there's NEVER been any updates. <SMH>

 

What is wrong with my computer????:huh:

windows update error.jpg

  • 5 months later...

I've just completed this process and wanted to share my experience.  I started with a fresh install of Vista Business 64-bit with SP2 on an old Dell computer.  After reading this advice I let it run for two days before giving up.  Then I downloaded and installed the .NET framework and IE9 as mentioned.  I started checking for updates again and decided to leave it.  After almost 3 days (67 hours!) it has now finally found the updates and is installing them.  This is a dual core machine and one core was running the entire time.  Throughout the process I periodically checked task manager to confirm that the svchost.exe process was still doing something.  I can't image why it needed to spend 67 hours checking for updates, but eventually it did finish.

it's a major flaw with the outdated Windows Update Agent/Client application for Windows Vista having problems checking for 250+ worth of post-SP2 updates for Windows Vista, phansen.  The last version of the WUA for Vista is v7.6.7600.256 dated 6/2/2012 and lately it takes many hours for WU to check for updates under Vista.

 

Microsoft had permanently fixed this problem for Windows 7 users by updating the Windows Update Client app to v7.6.7601.23453 for Windows 7 SP1 starting with the KB3161608 June 2016 update rollup and with the KB3172605 July 2016 update rollup.  So far Microsoft has not issued a long-term fix for Windows Vista.

 

For those Vista SP2 (and some Win7 SP1) users still having problems with Windows Update taking so long in checking for updates, see this page for the solutions:

http://wu.krelay.de/en/

 

anyways, I've upgraded any of some old PCs I found using Vista to Win7 since Microsoft will end all support for Vista on April 11, 2017.

 

  • Like 2

as others have said, the 1st run-through of WU on a fresh install can literally take hours. i've run into this on server builds before. i just ended up leaving it overnight so it could finish the scan.

  • 4 weeks later...
On 11/2/2016 at 11:21 AM, Jason S. said:

as others have said, the 1st run-through of WU on a fresh install can literally take hours. i've run into this on server builds before. i just ended up leaving it overnight so it could finish the scan.

 

well you have that luxury of leaving your systems running overnight but I don't.

 

I'm a home PC user and I would never do such a thing since that would jack up my family's electric bill leaving a Vista based desktop PC on for many hours checking for Vista updates.

 

Thank goodness for tools like WSUS Offline Update and Autopatcher.  I'll use any one of those tools to manually update Vista on a fresh Vista installation, along with installing the very latest WIN32K.SYS update which is now KB3198234.

 

Check out the comments made on this Askwoody.com page:

https://www.askwoody.com/2016/vista-is-broken/

24 minutes ago, erpster3 said:

I'm a home PC user and I would never do such a thing since that would jack up my family's electric bill leaving a Vista based desktop PC on for many hours checking for Vista updates.

Not sure if serious…

On 11/2/2016 at 1:21 PM, Jason S. said:

as others have said, the 1st run-through of WU on a fresh install can literally take hours. i've run into this on server builds before. i just ended up leaving it overnight so it could finish the scan.

 
 

I always though with Vista it takes that long everytime you check for updates.

I still have a vista machine in my home.  You should edit your title, you have an question mark where a period should be. 

 

They took steps to alleviate this issue in windows 7...not sure about vista.   Had to run the WSUS offline update (a third party tool?)  to update my dad's computer recently.  He wasn't getting updates because windows update wasn't completing in a logical amount of time.

 

[edit] I didn't realize that this thread was started on 2015.  erpster gave a really good post on the subject though, thanks for the info.

You may need to let it run for several days. Vista will eventually update. It's just so slow it's pathetic.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Pretty nice tool, thanks
    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      83
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!