Windows 7 SP1 v.178

[LiquidSolstice]

Perhaps someone can provide me a HASH of what I should be looking for? If this breaks the rules, forget it.

[+Anarkii Subscriber²]

There are watermark and timebomb (expires 4/1/2011 6:59am) on my system after i installed this beta.Anyone else or just me?

That was one of the reasons I uninstalled it. :p

[LiquidSolstice]

Bleh. Watermark doesn't bug me. Computer is due for a reinstall, held this install for a good 6 months, but I've tinkered with new software way too much.

[bjoswald]

Service Packs are generally just previous updates consolidated into a single package. No need to get antsy and download goofy alpha/beta/whatever builds from every back corner of the damn web. Just wait for them to come out of Redmond and save yourselves the trouble.

[xendrome]

I had minor issues with v 1.78. Every 10 mins or so live messenger would start randomly eating up RAM. Reverted back to normal after 12 hours or so of testing.

Live Messenger isn't part of the service pack, so that isn't a SP1 issue....

[LiquidSolstice]

Service Packs are generally just previous updates consolidated into a single package. No need to get antsy and download goofy alpha/beta/whatever builds from every back corner of the damn web. Just wait for them to come out of Redmond and save yourselves the trouble.

As I said, I'm due for a reinstall soon, and my computing system is set up that I can recover and restart from any reinstall within a matter of an hour or two. (Programs to install and documents to move all in carefully written bat files)

[DrCheese]

As far as I'm concerned, anyone crowing on about "It being so much faster!" or "It's so much snappier" can shut the hell up until they bother to do proper benchmarks showing before and after on the same system. It drives me up the sodding wall seeing people spout such rubbish with nothing to back it up. If you believed them during the Windows 7 betas, when every build was "faster" and "snappier" then the final build should have been 430000000000000 times faster than the first beta :rolleyes:

[torrentthief]

Perhaps someone can provide me a HASH of what I should be looking for? If this breaks the rules, forget it.

BUILD: 7601.16562.100603-1800

FILE: windows6.1-KB976932-x86-INTL.exe

SIZE: 300,592,880 byte

SHA-1: DDF007FA19A372579F91AA6EEA4A3D84B7D50163

MD5: 251F3B55A1AEAE5BDFD07F1394520BBB

CRC: 779B6D7C

NOTE: Wave0: English, French, German, Japanese, Spanish.

BUILD: 7601.16562.100603-1800

FILE: windows6.1-KB976932-X64-INTL.exe

SIZE: 562,976,752 byte

SHA-1: D0BBF9B7D762F6503E507530EE12C52432CA1E76

MD5: 639F6DF608E17805F6C61A02A134D8E5

CRC: 41C97038

NOTE: Wave0: English, French, German, Japanese, Spanish.

The 32bit is alot smaller than i thought it might be, 286mb, 64bit is 536mb

[LiquidSolstice]

As far as I'm concerned, anyone crowing on about "It being so much faster!" or "It's so much snappier" can shut the hell up until they bother to do proper benchmarks showing before and after on the same system. It drives me up the sodding wall seeing people spout such rubbish with nothing to back it up. If you believed them during the Windows 7 betas, when every build was "faster" and "snappier" then the final build should have been 430000000000000 times faster than the first beta :rolleyes:

As far as I'm concerned, anyone jumping in here replying to a thread, which asks who else has been using it, without ACTUALLY using it can shut the hell up until they get the balls to do the benchmarks themselves showing before and after on their own system. It drives me up the wall to see how easy it is for someone to take the high ground without actually doing anything to support their claims or condescending remarks..

We have our own defintions of faster and snappier, thank you very ****ing much and this was a peaceful thread asking everyone else who's tried it what they thought so far. Not everything with computers has to involve benchmarking and statistics, sometimes it simply does feel slightly faster.

Translation? Eat your own dog food. Get the service pack, do your own tests, and then complain if and when you find no difference, otherwise, get out of this thread and stop trying to insult those who are simply and enthusiastically giving their own feedback about it.

BUILD: 7601.16562.100603-1800

FILE: windows6.1-KB976932-x86-INTL.exe

SIZE: 300,592,880 byte

SHA-1: DDF007FA19A372579F91AA6EEA4A3D84B7D50163

MD5: 251F3B55A1AEAE5BDFD07F1394520BBB

CRC: 779B6D7C

NOTE: Wave0: English, French, German, Japanese, Spanish.

BUILD: 7601.16562.100603-1800

FILE: windows6.1-KB976932-X64-INTL.exe

SIZE: 562,976,752 byte

SHA-1: D0BBF9B7D762F6503E507530EE12C52432CA1E76

MD5: 639F6DF608E17805F6C61A02A134D8E5

CRC: 41C97038

NOTE: Wave0: English, French, German, Japanese, Spanish.

Thank you, good sir. :)

[+Anarkii Subscriber²]

Live Messenger isn't part of the service pack, so that isn't a SP1 issue....

Reverted back anyway. Still will wait for the final :)

[DrCheese]

As far as I'm concerned, anyone jumping in here replying to a thread, which asks who else has been using it, without ACTUALLY using it can shut the hell up until they get the balls to do the benchmarks themselves showing before and after on their own system. It drives me up the wall to see how easy it is for someone to take the high ground without actually doing anything to support their claims or condescending remarks..

What? I don't see the point in hosing my system with a beta service pack.=

I may install it on a test system at work and a test 2008 r2 system so I can play with remotefx but that's about it.

It drives me up the wall to see how easy it is for someone to take the high ground without actually doing anything to support their claims or condescending remarks..

Wait, so it drives you up the wall when people don't support their claims, like saying it's faster with no hard stats? Glad we're in agreement then.

We have our own defintions of faster and snappier,

What? That doesn't even make sense. There's only one definition of both. Either it's faster, or it's not. If it "feels" faster but actually isn't then it's... not faster.

[LiquidSolstice]

What? I don't see the point in hosing my system with a beta service pack.=

I may install it on a test system at work and a test 2008 r2 system so I can play with remotefx but that's about it.

Wait, so it drives you up the wall when people don't support their claims, like saying it's faster with no hard stats? Glad we're in agreement then.

What? That doesn't even make sense. There's only one definition of both. Either it's faster, or it's not. If it "feels" faster but actually isn't then it's... not faster.

"blah blah blah I didn't test it because if i'm not interested in testing it no one else should be because i'm personally afraid of it wrecking my system, but it can't possibly be faster so I'm going to sit here and patronize everyone who even tries to claim it does":rolleyes:

Did I miss anything? Don't think so. Oh wait, the OP still one-ups you because he's still actually installed the service pack which far more than you can say.

Nice try on the faster/snappier wordplay, seeing as I took those words straight out of YOUR post.

Anyways, grabbing it now, will report back when I have it.

[DrCheese]

Sigh. I'm just angry at people who install it, spend 15 minutes using it and go around saying it's faster when they have nothing to back it up with. Yes, I know I don't either but it's virtually impossible for what is essentially a collection of hotfixes to speed up a system enough that a user would notice it. If you put two systems side by side and the user had no idea which system was SP1'd or not, I highly doubt they would be able to tell the difference.

I am just sick to the back teeth of whenever an update is released for software, no matter how minor it is, you have people going around saying "It's faster!!!" Even if that update is an ultra small update one line codebase change that fixes a single security related issue, you still get people going around saying it. It's annoying. It doesn't exactly do the tech community any favours

[LiquidSolstice]

Sigh. I'm just angry at people who install it, spend 15 minutes using it and go around saying it's faster when they have nothing to back it up with. Yes, I know I don't either but it's virtually impossible for what is essentially a collection of hotfixes to speed up a system enough that a user would notice it. If you put two systems side by side and the user had no idea which system was SP1'd or not, I highly doubt they would be able to tell the difference.

But freind, you know that we're not just regular users. There are people here who know their system so thoroughly that they'd be able to spot minor improvements.

I am just sick to the back teeth of whenever an update is released for software, no matter how minor it is, you have people going around saying "It's faster!!!" Even if that update is an ultra small update one line codebase change that fixes a single security related issue, you still get people going around saying it. It's annoying. It doesn't exactly do the tech community any favours

Perhaps, but for one, I don't see anyone making such outlandish claims here (at least, not without being 100% confident about it and having the reputation to back it up), and for two, there will always be idiots in the tech community who want to think they know more than they do. We can't stop that, but what we can do is test these things for ourselves and share our personal feedback rather than generalizing about it.

No hard feelings, just wanted you to re-analyze what you were saying.

[LiquidSolstice]

Erm, hate to double post, but why is it I don't have any sort of watermark?

[kukubau]

If this is warez talk then please close the topic, I guessed that as it will be given to us free its not warez so..

I just installed the v.178 of Windows 7 SP1 and I am amazed, we all thought "What could they possibly do to make Windows 7 better than it already is" but somehow, they have, everything is so much quicker to respond, after first boot, the system response time even while loading was faster than when the system had been awake for 10 minutes, I can not wait for the final version, whatever they have done, they've done it right, and no annoying watermark and no timebomb either

Very impressed

How come there's no watermark? There is one. Bottom right corner.

[Owen W Veteran]

If this is warez talk then please close the topic, I guessed that as it will be given to us free its not warez so..

I just installed the v.178 of Windows 7 SP1 and I am amazed, we all thought "What could they possibly do to make Windows 7 better than it already is" but somehow, they have, everything is so much quicker to respond, after first boot, the system response time even while loading was faster than when the system had been awake for 10 minutes, I can not wait for the final version, whatever they have done, they've done it right, and no annoying watermark and no timebomb either

Very impressed

I don't understand what would make it faster??

There's not a single fix in there that should do that.

[Knife Party]

only time and benchmarks will reveal the claimed speed increases once Final, so people keep ya panties on...jeez :huh:

[hdood]

But freind, you know that we're not just regular users. There are people here who know their system so thoroughly that they'd be able to spot minor improvements.

Even if you want to claim that, that doesn't necessarily mean they aren't still susceptible to the placebo effect, especially if they have expectations.

Perhaps, but for one, I don't see anyone making such outlandish claims here (at least, not without being 100% confident about it and having the reputation to back it up), and for two, there will always be idiots in the tech community who want to think they know more than they do. We can't stop that, but what we can do is test these things for ourselves and share our personal feedback rather than generalizing about it.

The OP's claim was that "[...] somehow, they have, everything is so much quicker to respond, after first boot, the system response time even while loading was faster than when the system had been awake for 10 minutes"

Unless there was something wrong with his system before, it probably is not true. It's theoretically possible that there was a bug somewhere that severely affected performance on a small number of systems (his included), and that fixing it restored the performance to what it should be. In that case, it's unlikely to affect most people here. If someone wants to claim that there have been actual performance improvements (especially of this magnitude), it's a big enough claim that it really does need to be backed up by evidence. Windows Performance Analyzer from the Windows SDK can help with this. Anecdotes are meaningless.

[LiquidSolstice]

Even if you want to claim that, that doesn't necessarily mean they aren't still susceptible to the placebo effect, especially if they have expectations.

The OP's claim was that "[...] somehow, they have, everything is so much quicker to respond, after first boot, the system response time even while loading was faster than when the system had been awake for 10 minutes"

Unless there was something wrong with his system before, it probably is not true. It's theoretically possible that there was a bug somewhere that severely affected performance on a small number of systems (his included), and that fixing it restored the performance to what it should be. In that case, it's unlikely to affect most people here. If someone wants to claim that there have been actual performance improvements (especially of this magnitude), it's a big enough claim that it really does need to be backed up by evidence. Windows Performance Analyzer from the Windows SDK can help with this. Anecdotes are meaningless.

Right, you know what? Let's just forget about all this and be ultra-f***ing serious about every little thing we say about our computers, because god forbid we make a small casual statement that something seems a bit faster without being forced to do several benchmarking tests in order to prove we're not total and complete liars, right?

Can't we all just get a grip and take it easy? It's obvious by the custom-built nature of the OP's desktop and his four years of membership at a tech forum (many more years as a computer user, I'm sure) WOULD notice something different about his computer, and using simple cause and effect, it wasn't working the way it is now before the Service Pack.

If you posted a picture twice and the second time it was a couple pixels larger, and I said that, would you give me all this crap and force me to measure it in a photo-editing app? No? Then let it go. This is so ridiculous to see people constantly harping on about this.

The whole world isn't staring at this forum to see what the Service Pack is like, it's just the few people who've run across this thread, so you can't really play the whole "preventing the spread of misinformation" play because it doesn't work here. The majority of the people on this forum are smart enough to know what a service pack is and what to expect and not expect from it. That doesn't mean cases where people feel its somewhat faster are entirely irrelevant, for all you know (which I state again, seeing as neither of you have tried the Service Pack), it might actually do something that improves speed and reliability, because although you keep spewing your learnt-by-heart speeches of "oh its all just hot-fixes and RemoteFX", keep in mind this Service Pack is supposed to have unreleased hotfixes in it as well, and that might be something to consider, especially if those hot-fixes affect specific hardware ranges.

[XerXis]

Well, something in the service pack has fixed something, 100% can feel a speed increase and Im not imagining it, I installed the other early one and had nothing but issues, this one works for me

can you all say "placebo" :p

[hdood]

Right, you know what? Let's just forget about all this and be ultra-f***ing serious about every little thing we say about our computers, because god forbid we make a small casual statement that something seems a bit faster without being forced to do several benchmarking tests in order to prove we're not total and complete liars, right?

Hey, you seem to be the one getting all worked up because someone points out that the weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness. I'll just go back to enjoying my Windows 8.

[LiquidSolstice]

Hey, you seem to be the one getting all worked up because someone points out that the weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness. I'll just go back to enjoying my Windows 8.

You do that, go give someone in that forum a hard time instead, thanks.

[Udedenkz]

Is the bad performance when scrolling in explorer and scrolling through the song list in WMP fixed?

[torrentthief]

Whats bug fixes are people noticing in SP1 beta? Any newer default gpu drivers included in it?

I'm running it now but haven't noticed any differences at all, i already had latest nvidia gpu drivers so can't tell if newer ones are included.

Microsoft has just announced that SP1 Final won't be out until 2011 - http://news.softpedia.com/news/Windows-7-SP1-Final-Drops-in-2011-147362.shtml