Windows Vista SP1 RC Refresh available to the public
By Darren Murph 
posted January 14th 2008 11:05AM
posted January 14th 2008 11:05AM
[Via ZDNet]
posted January 14th 2008 11:05AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Interestingly enough Windows 2008 Server is built on the same code base as Vista SP1. My guess is that SP1 would have been really a lot sooner had it not been for all of the additional server testing. See below:
http://windows2008.informedcio.com/2008/01/27/windows-server-2008-tested-by-hundreds-of-thousands-of-consumers.aspx
-Paul
Man, this sounds so good that I'm going to download it and I don't even have Vista.
About time!
Polished turd SP1
Vista needs the junk stripped away not more added
vista is fine but i want it better then what i hear this lame SP will fix
Also why test a beta im just going to wait for the final release
SP1?? RC ???? omg and the SP2 GM of leopard is due for this week!
Oh no!
Now we will get all the Windows-enthusiasts sayng how OS X 10.0.x updates are really like hotfixes and that the 10.x.0 updates are like service packs.
I think you just started a geek war.
no, bender i dont think he started that. but i DO think he's a douche
can someone who actually downloaded SP1 give us some feedback on how it is?
I was having trouble copying large files over my network but with the RC it works fine now. Also, I'm not certain but my laptop seems to connect to my wireless network a lot faster when coming back from standby. From what I've read about SP these are both issues that it is supposed to address.
Hey, I'm using the RC1 refresh (Vista HP 32bit) and I've gotta say it's pretty spiffy. I've never had any problems with Vista, as I'm running a quad core 6600 OCed on air to 3.4ghz and 4gb of RAM, but one annoying thing is that 32 bit windows can't natively 'see' or use 4gb of RAM. So I was seeing 3.25, which is no big deal as I had planned to go to 64bit Vista anyway as soon as Vista+SP1 is released to disk - but I CAN tell you that one 'visible' fix is that you'll now natively see and be able to use 4gb on 32bit Vista. In addition to that, moving files used to be a tad slow compared to XP and now they fly. I just got it about 2 hrs ago so I haven't noticed anything else yet. When I do I'll update if anyone is really interested.
Since I never had any problems, I will probably unfortunately not notice as much gain over someone who was having issues/problems with it. We'll see.
@Neoprimal: REALLY? It's a pretty impressive feat to get 4 GB RAM recognized by any 32-bit operating system because of addressing issues... and are you sure your system can USE all 4 GB rather than just reporting it's there? I'm not an expert, but I've never heard of any non-64-bit system getting around that problem.
On the issue - http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html
Actually, Vista SP1 can "see" all 4GB but still can't use it. No 32 bit OS can use all 4GB of RAM. Just get x64 and dual boot, but you probably won't need the 32 bit OS anyway.
Hey, sorry about that. I know about the 32bit OS limitation. I meant that it can SEE it. Otherwise I wouldn't need to get 64bit Vista! hehehe. I'm getting it on the sole basis that 32bit Vista, 'see it' or not can't use it. Sorry again for slipping up.
I've never had any problems with Vista and I'm very satisfied with it. It offers plenty of nifty features for me who is a blogger and work with a pictures every day. And superfetch is awesome making loading of thumbnails shorter.
Despite not having any issues with Vista I installed SP1 RC when it came out. To my disappointment it didn't offer any performance enhancements, not only that but it ate up a little over 2GB, so I uninstalled it. Hopefully the final SP1 will be worth while installing because people with laptops don't have to many gigs to spare for updates which don't really do anything.
Never had any issues with Vista? You can only be doing simple tasks like web browsing and email.
My new tx1410us (hp tabletpc) has AMD64x2/HomePremium and runs like molasses.
Took 75% more time to scan my 20GB media (legal) collection than XP. Much of my legal media takes 20sec before playing in MCE.
Scheduled backups? Gone. Remote admin of any kind? Gone.
Had hard crash and had to rollback updates after 1 day.
Crashes every day on me. Still won't recognize 2nd 320GB usb drive. It worked for first 2 days then I started getting usb drive errors. Same exact hub and 2 drives works fine on XP.
Only Vista Ultimate gives you remote admin capability, backups and XP down...I mean upgrade option.
I want what you're smoking.
"Never had any issues with Vista? You can only be doing simple tasks like web browsing and email."
I don't think so. I did everything on Vista Ultimate I did on my XP home with ZERO problems. Yes ZERO problems, I never once had an issue with anything. I had more problems with Ubuntu adn my video and sound cards than I did with Vista. The only reason I stopped using Vista is because I didn't like all the extra steps it took to get something done with Vista. I'm not hating on Ubuntu either, I loved it when it didn't freeze, it's just my desktop setup wasn't the best for Ubuntu, although I'll be switching to it full time when I buy a new laptop.
Mike Klein:
Are you using Linux drivers or what?
I bought vista for my Pavilion dv9074ea with 1.85Ghz AMD 64 X2. Crashes on you every day? Then there must be something wrong with your laptop because mine barely ever crashes. I play Counter strike source, sync with my Zune, use MS Office and play around with photo shop and such. Can't say that my experience has been any where near yours. You either need to update your drivers/bios, run a virus check, format or turn your laptop in for repair. My Vista experience is awesome.
PS: I don't smoke anything. I prefer putting things like cantaloupe melon, cinnamon flavored waffles and mango juice in my mouth.
Add me to the no problems list.
Never crashes and runs smooth on my home built rig.
And I do a lot with Vista Programming, Photoshop, Flash, Networked,Web server, FTP Server, Full time PVR with Media Center, Ubuntu on a virtual box, and a few high end games.
All updates come in and install with no problems,
I updated to SP1 RC1 with no problems too.
For those having problems, I don't know what to say. Maybe your just trying to run 3D Studio Max on 1 GB ram and 20 GB hard drives on your Dell?
@ Mike Klein
Maybe you should stop visiting those pron sites, and check the addons running in Internet Explorer. (And disable all the ones you don't recognize [which may be all of them, if you can't even get Windows to run smoothly])
I have no problems with Windows. Windows Vista never just dies on me. Ever. I have the rare browser crash, now and then, but I fault some poor website scripting for that. (Ex: Let's see how many ways we can program a window to popup by bypassing the protection in IE)
Windows Vista (and XP) are very, very stable. It's the software you install AFTER the OS that causes your computer to crash.
@Brian...it's a vanilla install. No 3rd party software is on the box.
All of the comments I am reading fly in the face of reported issues and first hand experience.
None of these random issues occur under my multiple XP or linux machines...
I have jsut (tried) to install the update, and at the moment my computer is telling me I have no connection to a network, and I can't open the control panel or windows update to check for more updates...
"SP1?? RC ???? omg and the SP2 GM of leopard is due for this week!"
I don't think 10.5.2 really counts as a serive pack. And bear in mind 10.5.2 is full of BUG FIXES ! like SMB problems & WIFI problems.
I downloaded SP1 RC1 Refresh from M$ website at the start of last week Engadget must be slipping lol
Although it really doesn't quite fix all the problems, my file transfers are still way slower than XP but maybe slighlty faster than before.
Does seem to start up alot faster though. My laptop still won't wake from sleep mind you BAH !
Yeah right like Vista SP1 ain't just a hotfix for all Vista problems?!
Sorry i meant a hotfix for all the Vista "features"
I didn't say it wasn't, I just don't think you can call 10.5.2 a service pack.
I own 2 vista systems, 2 leopard systems and an XP system. I can clearly see the problems with both (vista does have alot more) I just think Leopard should not be treated as a holy grail of OSes when i have to live with Leopards bugs too.
I dual boot Vista Home Premium and OS X 10.5.1 on my MacBook Pro. So far, Vista is slower to boot and runs hotter, but it's been bug free. I don't consider Microsoft's over-protective security crap as bugs, per se, just irritating design choices.
The problem I have with both is finding decent, stable device drivers for some of my external audio kit... but that is the fault of the manufacturer, not the software companies.
Why would you want to install a release candidate of a service pack? Surely one of the main purposes of a service pack is to fix bugs. Unless Microsoft are paying you to test it, waiting for the final release is just common sense.
Once SP1 hits the streets in some sort of final version, I'll finally install Vista on my PC I think. I'm interested to see how SP1 does once a large number of vista users get their hands on it.
I've been running vista since october...
initially, the only issue I had was my wireless card drivers. about a month in and they were fixed via a convenient "solution found" notice from the os.
yea... I won't be going back to xp any time soon... (in a bit of a twist, I hardly ever boot up mac os x86 or ubuntu anymore)
the only issues I can think of are copy and move times... but they've already said that they were going to be fixed in sp1 (which I won't be using until it's finalized)
on a side note, I did try the sp1 rc1 and it was indeed notably faster, but I didn't particularly want to run it yet, so I did a system restore.
Ok, you've told us how it's NOT WORSE than XP, but now tell us how it's BETTER than XP, considering it costs $400 for the version with all the bells and whistles, and it requires at least twice the hardware capability of XP.
I'm expecting massive, shocking improvements for $400 and the costly hardware requirements.
@Scott
You can get an OEM copy of Vista Ultimate from Amazon for ~$170. Just doesn't come in the fancy packaging you'll get from a retail store.
lol, I'm gonna be lazy and just copy and paste from something I typed elsewhere
(also, I don't buy software, so price doesn't matter to me)
anyways, here's some things:
start menu
search
clock/s
multithreaded explorer, not only does it have useful views, it also never crashes
stability (depending on what other programs are installed, no problems here)
cs3 works great on it
install the performance and reliability patch and it's just as fast as xp sept for copy times.. which will be addressed in sp1
it has it's own partitioning program built in
shared folders work so much faster
it ain't pretty but it's by far better than xp's fischer price theme
preview pane, live icons, etc...
no more active desktop to use jpegs
if you try to shut down with programs running, it will ask if you want to save the files first
live thumbnails
animations are nothing new, but one more thing that beats xp
everything supports alpha transparency
installation is simple-er
uac has a check box that lets you turn it off
system monitors have loads of info
xp runs out of handles and crashes.. vista doesn't seem to have a limit
audio stacks (i.e. volume for each individual program running)
preloads programs into memory for instantaneous load times
improved command line
ctrl +alt + del pauses everything and takes you to an option screen
ctrl + shift + esc brings up the task manager
ending a program actually ends the program (that's for the cmd+q peps)
"programs and features" is better than "add/remove programs" (multiple uninstalls running at once, runs as a separate entity)
regedit has a search function
I suppose security is better, I have yet to see any malware... granted... I watch what I download
the os has every option xp had (and more), some things have been moved, no worse, no better.. just takes some getting used to
the list goes on...
I've been running vista since october...
initially, the only issue I had was my wireless card drivers. about a month in and they were fixed via a convenient "solution found" notice from the os.
yea... I won't be going back to xp any time soon... (in a bit of a twist, I hardly ever boot up mac os x86 or ubuntu anymore)
the only issues I can think of are copy and move times... but they've already said that they were going to be fixed in sp1 (which I won't be using until it's finalized)
on a side note, I did try the sp1 rc1 and it was indeed notably faster, but I didn't particularly want to run it yet, so I did a system restore.
As it has been mentioned. SP 1 for Vista also increased my connection speeds to wireless from sleep and standby. I have also noticed improvements in speed to fully boot my computer. One down side for me is that I am using MS office 2007 and it errors every time I close it and tries to restart itself. It could just be something I screwed up, but I will give RC a go here soon and let you guys know if it solved issues such as that.
*meanders past all the pro/anti vista/OSX crap.*
So did they fix the bluescreen while web browsing of the earlier RC yet?
That doesn't quite make sense and I also don't think it's reasonable (Scott). Granted, Vista is heavy....but you're expecting revolutionary changes which no OS has made in history. There's nothing grand about other operating systems like Leopard over OsX or XP over Windows 2000; but you're asking for bang based on price, aren't you. It simply doesn't work that way. I'm not sure what you're comparing their pricing scheme to, but everyone's is different. I purchased my copy for $110 (Hope Premium 32bit), not $250 and am ready to go spend $160 on ultimate 64bit, not $400. As for huge changes. They may not be huge or mind shattering but they're there and I can honestly say that after using Vista I would never go back to XP, just like as I started using and got into XP, nothing could make me go back to 2000.
In my opinion, OSs are never revolutionary, but they are evolusionary and Vista is no different. It's heavy and slower now because the majority are still on yesterday's technology (2 cores and 2gb of Ram). Once the hardware catches up, Vista will be the next XP. Of course, the next OS will come and we'll all be complaining about the SAME thing. Our so-called 'current' 4 core and 4gb ram machines are slow and run Vista fine, in fact 10x faster than Windows 7, which runs perfectly fine on 8 cores and 8gb of RAM (just using numbers).
Windows 7? I'm pretty sure no one's gotten the chance to play with that yet...
Recently Ive been having a lot trouble with Vista, but thats only because Asus and who ever made my jank ass video card are lazy bastards who still havent released proper drivers... I really like vista but until hardware manufacturers get off their lazy asses and write some drivers, a lot of us are screwed.
I too have had problems with my video card in an Asus using Vista. The problem is that nVidia charge the hardware vendors to rebrand the drivers and pass them on. The solution is here: http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/ (all nVidia cards can actually use all the drivers) Currently I am using driver version 169.28 and it works great.
Anyway, if you really need to find the answer to your problem have a look through the site.
When the fawk is XP SP3 coming out? More people have XP since it is more reliable, so you think they would look out for the XP users more than trying to shove this Vista crap down our throats.
You should read more..
If you did, you will see that only very few are not satisfied with Vista, and that was when Vista was brand new and had hardware compatibility issue due to a lack of drivers.
Now I have Windows Vista 64-bit Ultimate, and it runs WAY better then XP (actually I found that Win2k runs better then WinXP, so I have to say that Vista runs better then Win2k)
So far, if you update your applications, Windows, games, drivers; you will see that you have a same or greater performance over XP Pro 32-bit (note: I use Windows Vista 64-bit). From me testing older games, I just saw running at about 5-10fps slower on Vista, but its nothing really visible (unless the game had a hard time running on your system before).
You might think I have this crazy Intel Quad Core CPU with a crazy video card... but no...
My system specs:
- 2Gb of RAM 400Mhz DDR, 3-3-3-6 2T
- nForce 4 16x SLI (ASUS A8N32-SLI *Deluxe*, with latest stable BIOS version)
- Geforce 6600GT 128MB
- AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Socket 939.
I'm going soon with an extra 1 or 2 GB of RAM, and a better video card to be able to play current and newer games at higher settings. So far my CPU never struggled, so I see no need to upgrade that.
wow, congrad-a-fuck-ulations! Maybe you should stop visiting the IWantToHumpGates.com forums and read the normal forums where they don't just idolize one format (Windows in this matter). Then you would see, a LOT of people think Vista sucks. Not only that, but companies don't even trust it because it has so many security holes! Most are reverting back to XP or going with Linux.
Is the boot up time faster with the "refresh" version (RC) SP1? I played with SP1 RC1 when it came out and I did not notice a difference.
Hey there,
I am running Vista Ultimate on a home built box, MSI MS-7220 mainboard, AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4400+, 2 gigs PC3200 RAM 3.0-3-3-8, nVIDIA GeForce 6600 PCI-E (Gigabyte GV-NX66) Video Adapter, Seagate 250 GB Barracuda 7200.10 Primary HD, WD 3200AAK External USB HD (300 GB) Secondary drive. I haven't installed the RC or the refresh yet but I can tell you some of the issues I have had with Vista Ultimate so far compared to XP Pro.
1. Much slower than XP to boot and shutdown.
2. Much slower file transfers. (either on the primary drive or from one drive to another)
3. Drivers are hard to find. (reminds me of XP Pro 64 bit when it was new)
4. Extra security features are a pain in the arse (example: always asking permission to run something or having to "run as administrator." to get a program to run right)
5. High CPU usage while running certain programs like Nero 7.
6. High RAM usage when doing nothing.(running 35% at idle)
Cs3 seems to run ok on it, HALO runs alright, Unreal Tournament ran like crap, it takes longer to transcode a video than XP, boot and shutdown times are much longer, various software and hardware compatibility problems, the fine print in the EULA is scary as hell, HD support is hardware dependent, if you don't have the hardware you get downgraded video. The security checks use a lot of CPU time(30 times a second, Thanks in part to Hollyweird!), and some other little issues that are annoying at best. There's no doubt it's buggy and designed in part to keep the MPIA happy but there are some things I like about it too, lots of eye candy and many things that have already been mentioned here.
In my opinion they released this OS way to soon, many of the features they promised such as the new file system fell through but Windows enthusiasts are stuck with it as mainstream support for XP Pro ends 4/14/2009 (I am not interested in the OS wars that go on, use whatever makes you happy but don't knock my choice.)
I'm going to try the refresh and see if it clears up any of the issues I have seen so far, if it does I'll post results here, if not I'll consider going back to XP Pro until they can get it right.