Vista SP2 RTM

[techbeck]

Said it before and will say it agian...Vista failed because....

People bought it and tried to run it on really old systems like they did with XP. Vista was the first OS from MS in a LONG time that required major hardware upgrades. People knew this but were to dumb and ignored the requirements and purchased Vista anyway. So they bitched and moaned so Vista got a bad rep. I do get a good laugh seeing people try and run Vista on a 20gb HD with 512mb of RAM...

Driver support was a big issue as well. MS released Vista way to soon.

The install size of Vista seems to be a big concern for a lot of people. It doesnt bother me since hard drives are CHEAP these days and most new systems have a 150gb or larger HD.

I have the following...

Vista Ultimate 64bit (personal gaming system)

Vista Business 64bit (personal work system)

Vista Business 32bit (laptop)

Vista Business 32bit (work laptop)

I have also installed Vista for several people. I have NO PROBLEMS what so ever with Vista and neither does the several other people I installed it for.

[soonerproud]

People like you just make my day. Get a clue. :rolleyes:

People that open their comment to me calling me a troll don't deserve a response. If they can't be at least respectful of different opinions, then I have no use for such a person.

[REM2000]

The initial RTM of Vista did have some annoying bugs in it, file copy, network performance and high memory utilization. This of course put a lot of people off Vista.

However this was understandable given that there was a lot of new technology in it (i.e. new network stack which was needed with improved IP6, new sound stack, etc.. etc..), which has to be matured, which it has, SP1 Vista runs well.

In my opinion Windows 7 and the Windows adverts are proof that Vista did fail, not in a technology point of view but more in a PR view. Windows 7's core is of course Windows Vista which proves of course that the underlying technology is sound.

However the high profile nature (i.e. it being named and shown everywhere) of Windows 7, coupled with the Microsoft Adverts which doesn't mention vista anywhere but simply refers to Windows, suggests that Microsoft wants to get rid of Vista ASAP.

There comes a point where the PR is so bad that it's practically impossible to change, so the only option is to release a newer product.

Windows ME suffered the same fate, i found ME very fast and very stable, however the bad press of ME continues to this day. At the time there were plenty of smaller networks using ME without a single problem.

I see a lot of companies and people hold off for Windows 7 and skip Vista entirely.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

Have you looked through Microsoft's knowledge base articles to see if a hotfix is available for your particular bug? Many hotfixes are only available in specific cases and linked to in these articles.

Aren't hotfixes best explained as BETA patches that are rushed out to fix immediate issues affecting specific cases? Hence why MSs previous policy was to only make them available after a support call and now making them STILL not directly (easily) downloadable. The hotfixes are properly tested and vetted when they are rolled out in the next Service Pack build. That alone makes service packs worth it.

Even Microsoft warns you to be careful installing their hotfixes...

A supported hotfix is available from Microsoft. However, this hotfix is intended to correct only the problem that is described in this article. Apply this hotfix only to systems that are experiencing this specific problem. This hotfix might receive additional testing. Therefore, if you are not severely affected by this problem, we recommend that you wait for the next software update that contains this hotfix.

A hotfix warning message on Microsoft Support.

[Crackler]

People that open their comment to me calling me a troll don't deserve a response. If they can't be at least respectful of different opinions, then I have no use for such a person.

While I agree with that, stop picking fights online. :p

Let's all get along before the Neowin Forum Police shows up. :woot:

[MagicAndre1981]

Hey, quick question. Does anyone know what version of .NET comes pre-installed with Vista SP2?

.net 2/3 Sp2.

Vista was the first OS from MS in a LONG time that required major hardware upgrades. People knew this but were to dumb and ignored the requirements and purchased Vista anyway.

This is nonsense. You can run Vista fine on PCs from 2002/2003 if you install 1 or 2 GB of RAM.

Driver support was a big issue as well. MS released Vista way to soon.

this is not the fault of MS. nVIDIA was the devil. They made the worst drivers, which caused over 30% of the BSODs you got on Vista. MS released WDK and SDK packages for every TAP and CTP Build and if the partners didn't made the drivers it's not the fault of MS :rolleyes:

The install size of Vista seems to be a big concern for a lot of people.

this come from a NTFS limitation. NTFS counts the size of a hardlink. The files are stored inside the WinSxS folder and are hardlinked into the destination folder. Now NTFS reports that such linked file uses the spaces inside the WinSxS and the destination folder. This is a 10 year old NTZFs issue, not an issue of VISTA. Windows 7 has the same issue!! So Win7 also sucks because of this issue?

[JustGeorge]

Have you looked through Microsoft's knowledge base articles to see if a hotfix is available for your particular bug? Many hotfixes are only available in specific cases and linked to in these articles.

The hotfix made available doesn't fully address the problem I have. On my PC, it won't re-establish a connection at all after resuming from sleep. Only a reboot fixes it. I remember reading about the problem and an MS rep saying the fix for it won't be made available till SP2. Might as well wait now since its so close.

[techbeck]

This is nonsense. You can run Vista fine on PCs from 2002/2003 if you install 1 or 2 GB of RAM.

this is not the fault of MS. nVIDIA was the devil. They made the worst drivers, which caused over 30% of the BSODs you got on Vista. MS released WDK and SDK packages for every TAP and CTP Build and if the partners didn't made the drivers it's not the fault of MS :rolleyes:

this come from a NTFS limitation. NTFS counts the size of a hardlink. The files are stored inside the WinSxS folder and are hardlinked into the destination folder. Now NTFS reports that such linked file uses the spaces inside the WinSxS and the destination folder. This is a 10 year old NTZFs issue, not an issue of VISTA. Windows 7 has the same issue!! So Win7 also sucks because of this issue?

Let me make one thing clear, I never said vista sucked. I said I like Vista...I use it on 4 diff systems...

And to a lot of novices, a memory upgrade is a big deal. The fact that you have to upgrade your hardware is a big deal to a lot of people who want to just install something without buying extra components.

And Vista had more driver issues besides NVIDIA's crappy ones.

And my point still stands on the size issue. It took up a lot of space...period...doesnt matter if it is an NTFS issue, it is a Vista issue as well. They designed Vista with this limitation using an old file system.

[freakyfriday]

latest leaked right now is.

6002.18003.090403-1730

thats the latest RTM Escrow

[soonerproud]

While I agree with that, stop picking fights online. :p

Let's all get along before the Neowin Forum Police shows up. :woot:

I wasn't picking a fight, that is the point. If my post came across that way, it was not my intention at all.

Let me make one thing clear, I never said vista sucked. I said I like Vista...I use it on 4 diff systems...

And to a lot of novices, a memory upgrade is a big deal. The fact that you have to upgrade your hardware is a big deal to a lot of people who want to just install something without buying extra components.

Most people don't upgrade their operating system, they just buy a new computer. If a user is technical enough to figure out how to upgrade or install a new OS, they are technical enough to figure out how to upgrade their RAM.

[techbeck]

Most people don't upgrade their operating system, they just buy a new computer. If a user is technical enough to figure out how to upgrade or install a new OS, they are technical enough to figure out how to upgrade their RAM.

Where do you live that people buy a new system every time a new OS comes out? And I know many people who can install a new OS and are very software savy but dont know crap about on the hardware side. Seems like you are making assumptions on how you think people are and their abilities.

This is nonsense. You can run Vista fine on PCs from 2002/2003 if you install 1 or 2 GB of RAM.

Have you personally seen Vista running on a PC from 2002?

[morphen]

Welcome to my iggy list, jerk.

wtf is a iggylist?

[techbeck]

wtf is a iggylist?

Ignore List

[Astra.Xtreme]

Most people don't upgrade their operating system, they just buy a new computer.

I, as I'm sure many others, would have to disagree with that.

There are actually some people who would rather spend $200 on an OS rather than $1500 on a new setup.

[soonerproud]

Where do you live that people buy a new system every time a new OS comes out? And I know many people who can install a new OS and are very software savy but dont know crap about on the hardware side. Seems like you are making assumptions on how you think people are and their abilities.

They don't because most people could care less about the OS on the computer as long as the word Windows is in the title. The point is only a small percentage of people actually ever upgrade a old computer to a new OS.

You are not represenative of everyone and installing memory is a heck of a lot easier than installing a OS so I don't see how someone can figure out how to install a OS and be completely clueless on how to upgrade memory. All it takes is Google to figure something so simple out.

I, as I'm sure many others, would have to disagree with that.

There are actually some people who would rather spend $200 on an OS rather than $1500 on a new setup.

I bolded the key word some.

Some = Few

[techbeck]

They don't because most people could care less about the OS on the computer as long as the word Windows is in the title. The point is only a small percentage of people actually ever upgrade a old computer to a new OS.

You are not represenative of everyone and installing memory is a heck of a lot easier than installing a OS so I don't see how someone can figure out how to install a OS and be completely clueless on how to upgrade memory. All it takes is Google to figure something so simple out.

Where is your stats or where does it say that most people would rather buy a new PC than upgrade the OS? As far as I am concerned, you are stating your opinion and it is not fact. If people dont want to upgrade the OS, then when sell it separately and limit it to new systems only?

ANd installing memory is easier? MOST people dont know what speed/brand/model to buy. They go out and buy the wrong kind and it can damage your other components or not work at all. I have worked on PCs where the wrong memory was installed so people try to jam it in there damaging the memory slot. I have even worked on PCs where the memory wasnt plugged in all the way, or upside down, frying the mobo.

And people are afraid of hardware and opening up the computer. It can be very intimidating for a lot of people to look in side of a PC and try to figure things out. I have stood by people and had them do the work before and they were resistant even after they knew how to do it. If everyone could work on hardware/software...then I would be out of a job.

Edited April 22, 2009 by techbeck

[justlooking]

What's Windows Vista again?

It's Windows 7 without the disconnection problems.

[soonerproud]

Where is your stats or where does it say that most people would rather buy a new PC than upgrade the OS? As far as I am concerned, you are stating your opinion and it is not fact. If people dont want to upgrade the OS, then when sell it separately and limit it to new systems only?

ANd installing memory is easier? MOST people dont know what speed/brand/model to buy. They go out and buy the wrong kind and it can damage your other components or not work at all.

And people are afraid of hardware and opening up the computer. It can be very intimidating for a lot of people to look in side of a PC and try to figure things out. I have stood by people and had them do the work before and they were resistant even after they knew how to do it.

Neither one of us have provided stats but all you have to do if you want to do the actual leg work is get Microsoft's numbers on how many retail and upgrade copies they sale and divide that by the number of known working PC'S. (Which is over a billion to date.) Knock yourself out if you want to do the math, but mark my words I am right on this one.

(You are coming at this from our geeky perspective and I am trying to get you to look at this from a regular consumers point of view.)

People are afraid of a lot of simple things, but that doesn't mean they will never try it.

Edit: All the end user has to do is Google the make and model of the PC and they will find out all the info they need to upgrade their memory. Nothing hard about it.

[Eric Veteran]

Hey, quick question. Does anyone know what version of .NET comes pre-installed with Vista SP2?

I haven't tried the SP2 beta, I wouldn't think .NET would be in the service pack. It's standard with Vista so it should have been updated all along. (Current is 3.5 SP1.)

[Astra.Xtreme]

I bolded the key word some.

Some = Few

I think you failed to sense the sarcasm.

[techbeck]

Neither one of us have provided stats but all you have to do if you want to do the actual leg work is get Microsoft's numbers on how many retail and upgrade copies they sale and divide that by the number of known working PC'S. (Which is over a billion to date.) Knock yourself out if you want to do the math, but mark my words I am right on this one.

(You are coming at this from our geeky perspective and I am trying to get you to look at this from a regular consumers point of view.)

People are afraid of a lot of simple things, but that doesn't mean they will never try it.

Dude, networking and computers is my job. I deal with the average Joe every single day and I know how they think and act. And dont get me started on family. Retail copies mean people doing a non upgrade/full install of an OS on an exisiting system. People who buy computers use OEM copies of the software.So yea, there are A LOT of retail copies of an OS being sold because people want to upgrade their system instead of buy a new one.

And my points on memory still stand. I can Google how to switch out the radiator in my car...but do I feel comfortable doing it on myself? Mechanics will think this is easy but for me who doesnt dig to deep in to car repairs, will think its a PITA even after seeing it done.

Edited April 22, 2009 by techbeck

[Osiris]

Thats the beauty of PCs isnt it - plenty of choice to go around.

I would agree though hardware requirements and driver support were some of the initial issues that hurt vistas opening perceptions very harshly. For the most part I agree with people who tried it on launch and didnt like it, I can see why, but Vista SP1 onwards has been great, and I agree with the person who said Windows 7 is proof Vista is a success. I think Microsoft must have had to swallow a pill to quitely abandon vista as such, however Windows 7 is like a R2 of Vista which leads me to believe Microsofts original vista based evolutionary roadmap is right on track.

I do find it amusing though how zealots will tear Vista down to shreds yet praise Windows 7 suggesting its nothing like Vista...

In any case, cant wait for SP2 and Office 2007 SP2 should hopefully be a good month of releases.

[soonerproud]

I think you failed to sense the sarcasm.

My sarcasm meter must be broken today. :blush:

[soonerproud]

Dude, networking and computers is my job. I deal with the average Joe every single day and I know how they think and act. And dont get me started on family. Retail copies mean people doing a non upgrade/full install of an OS on an exisiting system. People who buy computers use OEM copies of the software.

What I am trying to get across to you is the percentage of retail and upgrade copies pale in comparison to the number of OEM copies sold by a very large margin. You do this for a living so in your eyes people upgrade OS's all the time because that is what they hire you for. (Which also makes your memory argument moot because you install memory for these people too.)

I don't do this for a living and this is a hobby for me. I see far more people in my world every day using Windows 2000 and XP on computers over three years old all the time. I am the one that gets called to fix them and I am always trying to convince these people to upgrade to Vista. these people see no need because 2000 and XP does what they want and they are still happy with them. They also will not upgrade to a new version of Windows until time to buy a computer.

Edited April 22, 2009 by soonerproud

[iamwhoiam]

And my point still stands on the size issue. It took up a lot of space...period...doesnt matter if it is an NTFS issue, it is a Vista issue as well. They designed Vista with this limitation using an old file system.

It didn't take up as much space as you think it does or that it appears to.