Windows Vista Service Pack 1 RTM x86 leaked


Recommended Posts

Yeah for 64bit you need to give yourself owner rights and full permissions over the dll files :p or just use "take control" linked in that link!

What I mean is that there is a uxtheme.dll inside the sysWOW64 folder as well as in System32 folder. And the size differs from the one in System32. Hence my question.

All I can see is reg hacks to what seem to be beta builds :(

Please google Windows Vista SP1 Refresh 2 Reg ...4 letter word that begins with h...

RC1 Refresh 2 is the same as RTM, don't listen to what anyone else says about it, it was confirmed by MS.

If interested....some of the torrent sites have slipstreamed sp1 into vista. I took my LEGAL

product ID, wiped out a backup laptop drive, installed it and activated it with no problem.

Personally, when a SP comes out, I prefer to wipe and install with the SP slipstreamed.

Finally got my hands on the x64 version and have it installed. I've noticed a little more pep in the system. I tested copying a file, which was SP1 x64 and 726mb. It took about 30 seconds to copy, yay!

For those that are holding off to download the file from Microsoft, it's available on their OEM site. It's a DVD image that contains the standalone installers for SP1 both x86 and x64.

Link is here: http://oem.microsoft.com/downloads/VistaSP...frmcsp0_dvd.img

However, the download speeds are horrific. I'm just about managing 12KB/s. Download does take a while to get going.

Use of a download manager is highly recommended.

There appears to be 2 versions of the standalone installers, and I'm not sure which one is the offical..

The first is the ones that appears days ago that people were downloading from different mirrors.

The MD5s were:

X86: d597866e93bc8f80ecca234c4e9ce5a2

X64: 983308426e8ee7649f53b41f4e5c42d4

However, I downloaded the ISO that contains both of the files, as shown here:

83758877sv5.jpg

The installers on this disc, have different timestamps and MD5's.

If we compare the 2 x64 installers:

43010055kf0.jpg

Can anyone shed any light on to which installer is the one to use?

There appears to be 2 versions of the standalone installers, and I'm not sure which one is the offical..

The first is the ones that appears days ago that people were downloading from different mirrors.

The MD5s were:

X86: d597866e93bc8f80ecca234c4e9ce5a2

X64: 983308426e8ee7649f53b41f4e5c42d4

However, I downloaded the ISO that contains both of the files, as shown here:

The installers on this disc, have different timestamps and MD5's.

If we compare the 2 x64 installers:

Can anyone shed any light on to which installer is the one to use?

Could you check the actual installers? Have a look inside the actual exe and see what the time stamps etc are inside?

When will people learn, DON'T DOWNLOAD LEADKED FILES I would not have installed it to be honest but people will jump into the fire and get burned.

not again..... :p i guess digital signatures don't mean anything to you?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 27 is out.
    • My ice blue precision 3550 laptop
    • A coalition of publishers sued OpenAI and Microsoft over scraping content without consent by Hamid Ganji Image via Depositphotos.com AI companies often rely on readily available internet content to train their chatbots and provide users with instant answers. This method of AI training is fast and relatively inexpensive, but using a website’s content without permission or compensation is not something publishers like to see, and this is exactly why Microsoft and OpenAI are now being sued. As reported by Bloomberg, a group of publishers that collectively own nearly 400 newspapers has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. The coalition argues that the two companies scraped their content to build AI chatbots like ChatGPT and Copilot without paying any compensation. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, argues that while AI products have generated billions of dollars in market value using publishers’ work, none of that value has been shared with the publishers. The plaintiffs are seeking statutory damages and injunctive relief for alleged copyright infringement and violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. “Defendants systematically and secretly crawled the Publishers’ websites—including content behind paywalls and other access restrictions—and copied the Publishers’ articles, stories, and other original works onto their own servers without authorization,” the complaint states. The publishers also described the AI boom as a “death knell for local journalism” if AI companies that scrape content for free are not held accountable. Former New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin and his law firm, Platkin LLP, are representing the publishers. “Our models empower innovation, are trained on publicly available data, and are grounded in fair use,” OpenAI spokesperson Drew Pusateri told Bloomberg. This is not the first lawsuit involving the unauthorized use of publishers’ content by AI firms, but it is one of the largest coalitions ever formed against the free use of content by AI chatbots. In 2024, OpenAI and Microsoft also faced a similar lawsuit from eight newspapers that claimed AI products were benefiting from their content without permission.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      444
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      173
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      134
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!