Windows Vista Service Pack 1 RTM x86 leaked


Recommended Posts

Is there a CRC of a known good copy we can check this against? Or has someone tested this download?

x86 file version from that site:

md5 = d597866e93bc8f80ecca234c4e9ce5a2

File version on extractor says: 6.0.6001.17028

I'm guessing it's RC Refresh build.

File a Bug Report

Oh that's right, you can't

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Wow, you're totally useless and so is your post. :crazy:

Anyway, Daeron Tin?viel>, perhaps this Microsoft KB Article can help you:

You receive a "0x80070002" or "0x80070003" error code after you download an update from Windows Update, from Microsoft Update, or from Windows Server Update Services.[/b]>

x86 file version from that site:

md5 = d597866e93bc8f80ecca234c4e9ce5a2

File version on extractor says: 6.0.6001.17028

I'm guessing it's RC Refresh build.

Even build 18000 says 17028 if you check the properties on the installer itself so it likely is RTM.

Why thank you so very much. Now I can have a nice day.

They are on there own, so why would you offer to help?

Because, we are a community. Here to not only give each other virtual wedgies but to maybe help with a suggestion; not just laughing at someones misfortune or problem.

OK, here's a question.

I have downloaded and installed the X86 SP1 instaler (everything ok).

The filename is: Windows6.0-KB936330-X86.exe

The filesize is: 455.562.200 bytes

The MD5 cheksum is: d597866e93bc8f80ecca234c4e9ce5a2 (as mentioned before in a previous post)

The build mentioned in registry is: 6001.longhorn_rtm.080118-1840

And finally the file's Digital Signature is 19 of January 2008.

Now, I have also downloaded two X64 SP1 installers (haven't tried them yet).

The first one is 761.740.600 bytes and signed on 19 of Jan also.

The second is 914.983.528 bytes and signed on 20 of Jan.

Both have the same filename: Windows6.0-KB936330-X64.exe

Could be the second that is the multilanquge pack? (because it's bigger), or it's the corrected version and not

the one that OEMs got? (still it's big though).

UPDATE: on Bink's site it says that "Windows Vista SP1 RC Refresh 2 = The RTM build" and that the one you can download

with the registry hack is SP1. :woot:

Edited by venejo
What's that supposed to mean?

Sorry if my post doesn't cut the mustard with you.

I was just trying to get an opinion on the validity of the article.

FYI: new = not noob necessarily

If that is all you have to say maybe you can post me a link to get a refund on my subscription?

Thank you to anybody else who would have an opinion.

ALERT: stand back, sense of humour failure detected :shiftyninja:

I've heard SP1 can't be slipstreamed and only SP2 will be.

What is the cleanest way to install Vista with SP2, then? Surely not installing Vista then installing SP2 on top of it? :s

I've heard SP1 can't be slipstreamed and only SP2 will be.

What is the cleanest way to install Vista with SP2, then? Surely not installing Vista then installing SP2 on top of it? :s

You can download a slipstreamed SP1 ISO.

Microsoft themselves must of done it?

I'm sure they will issue out SP1 discs as well at somepoint?

Of course as an end user it's also possible to go through a reverse integration process - http://www.winbeta.org/comments.php?catid=1&id=9536

However that is tricky/messy and I'd suggest just downloading the SP1 integrated ISO off the net.

I myself as I said earlier would only of installed SP1 if I could integrate it into the installation - For 2 reasons, 1 so I can use Vlite and the other as I don't like installing RTM and THEN SP1 on top... just doesn't feel "effecient" to me.

You can download a slipstreamed SP1 iso.

As in Microsoft themselves must of done it.

I'm sure they will issue out SP1 discs as well at somepoint?

Of course as an end user it's also possible to go through a reverse integration process - http://www.winbeta.org/comments.php?catid=1&id=9536

However that is tricky/messy and I'd suggest just downloading the SP1 integrated ISO off the net.

I'll do that when it's available (Y)

I'll do that when it's available (Y)

It's available right now :p (im running it)

But I get your drift, once MS themselves offer it as a download. Fair enough (Y)

I also read that slipstreaming *might* be possible via the updated AIK. I will be trying this out when I get home. I've been able to find a x86 integrated iso on the 'Net, but not a x64 integrated iso, which is mainly what I'm looking for.

Slipstreaming SP1 is not possible in any way, shape or form even with an updated AIK. vLite.net has more info in their second post on an alternative method to "slip" it.

Slipstreaming SP1 is not possible in any way, shape or form even with an updated AIK. vLite.net has more info in their second post on an alternative method to "slip" it.

Yeah, I did some more research. Evidently, you can use the updated AIK in the reverse integration method, but not slipstream.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature 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
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!