Microsoft lets loose Vista SP1 for x64-based systems
By Donald Melanson 
posted Feb 21st 2008 12:26PM
posted Feb 21st 2008 12:26PM
Not a whole lot to say here, but if you're running Vista on an x64-based system, you've probably already noticed a little surprise courtesy of Windows Update, which today started pushing out the x64 edition of Vista Service Pack 1. If you've been following things in SP1 land, you'll notice that's actually ahead of the neat and tidy Windows Update launch for non-x64 systems, but behind the unofficial options already available. On the upside, that should mean that all the bugs have been ironed out, but you can never be too careful, so take all your usual pre-update precautions and let us know how it all works out in the comments below.
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
Any takers? let me know how it goes. Please be kind and one touch backup yo shite prior to doing so.
I assume this is the official release?
Microsoft generally doesn't push out unofficial releases over Windows Update.
Works great, no problems so far. Took about an hour to install like it said, though for a while I was worried that it froze since I was running programs when I shouldn't have been, but it unfroze after leaving it a lone for a few minutes and carried on without problems from there.
Downloading now..if I'm not back in an hour, send a repair install to find me.
Install complete with no problems. It failed twice, likely due to operator error. I then called MS support because I couldn't find anywhere online that said SP1 was officially released.
The tech support guys were also shocked to see that I had the option to update to SP1, as they had not heard the news. They helped me install the update and everything is back to normal.
MS doesn't charge for this one? Seems they don't want to do the same mistake as with Vista.
So what are the tons of new features coming with this SP? Spaces? Time Machine? Outlook enhancements? IE8? New MSN? Or is it just bug fixes?
Well it installed after 2 failures, neither of which MS give details of.
Error details: Code 800736CC
Error details: Code 8024200D
Then it installed fine, just took a while.
I am abit worried about this however
Windows Vista Service Pack 1 for x64-based Systems (KB936330)
Installation date: 21/02/2008 19:42
Installation status: Failed
Error details: Code 8024200D
Update type: Important
Windows Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) Beta is an update to Windows Vista that addresses key feedback from our customers. Windows Vista SP1 Beta addresses specific reliability and performance issues, supports new types of hardware and adds support for several emerging standards. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.
Why does it say Beta, shouldn't this be the final build.
iPriest, you're an idiot. You know Vista already had a superior backup system before Leopard even came out? It doesn't take a full snapshot everytime there's a backup like time machine does, it only records the changes. So there aren't any fancy graphics, but it's much more economical in terms of disk space usage, which I find to be more important than a flashy GUI. That said, sorry I responded to begin with, I don't like to feed trolls in general. My bad.
@chebwa and all you stupid low ranking bee-oches.
...You guys forgot about Service Pack for Windows (KB936330) aka vista sp1 beta? As I recall that WAS a windows update.
@OneLove
Chebwa did say 'generally,' so even if that were true, it doesn't make him wrong.
Why are you so bitter just because someone 'low ranked' you? Do you really think your new reply will get 'highly ranked?'
@tony
I dont care about rankings, but people should check the facts first. :)
@ JD so tell me what are the new features, because you explained about what you don't have, but could you know explain what you did get?
It looks like microsoft may have pulled the update?...as I said before...was that an official "final" release or SP1 beta again?
*sits on the x32-based wagon*
The 3GB limit of 32-bit Windows is annoying me, and my company. We want to switch to XP/Vista 64-bit to address more memory, but we've got to stick to 32-bit because one thing doesn't work in x64 (all drivers and other applications work fine).
It's a data feed application from Reuters. :(
I wish they'd get their backsides into gear and sort out x64 versions of their software. Actually, why didn't Microsoft simply make Vista 64-bit only? Whose going to run it on 32-bit chips anyway?
Not to be a picky bitch here, but 32 bit processors are actually called x86.
If you want to know why, it's the processor architecture used in 32 bit processors which was primarily used in early Intel Processors like the 8086 and the 80186 processors. It got the name x86 because all these processors have "86" at the end. While x64 processors come from a line of processors which have "64" at the end of their name.
I need to go outside...
*16/32bit processors...
@ ssuk
N.S.S. but yes, x86 means 16-bit as well as 32-bit processors matey ... that's why I specifically (and correctly) used the term 32-bit.
I still think Microsoft should've taken the x64 route for all Windows from Vista onwards, they're even planning x86 versions of Windows 7 ... sigh. Still, at least servers seem to be going exclusively x64.
The reason MS havent made Vista 64-bit only is because all the ppl currently whining about Vista would whine even more (waaa! It won't run on my Pentium III! Microsoft sucks! Apple rules! etc.). That, and the fact that some recent processors such as the Core Duo and Pentium 4 (except for the 6, 8 and 9 series) don't support 64-bit. That said, they should make Windows 7 64-bit only imo.
On the SP1 side, I can report 0 problems here, Vista feels a bit snappier, especially with file operations. This basically fixes bugs and improves performance, prepare to be underwhelmed. Microsoft was right, businesses had no reason to delay adoption until SP1.
Ah, I have a Pentium 4 640 in an old PC. Wasn't that the first consumer x64 Intel made? It has yet to see a x64 OS, and will likely never as I don't use it.
I heard when MS announced Vista, still called Longhorn back then, that it would be x64 exclusive. But when you think that Windows ME still supported 16bit, I expect that the OS after Windows 7 will still be x86.
Wow lets compare the story about the Leopard bug fix update ( http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/15/leopard-10-5-1-is-now-available/ ) and this one.
This story - "On the upside, that should mean that all the bugs have been ironed out, but you can never be too careful, so take all your usual pre-update precautions and let us know how it all works out in the comments below."
Leopard story - Hmm no not a single comment about being careful when installing it.
I don't get it.
He's saying that in Engadget's eyes Apple can do no wrong.
well yeah... Leopard ran slow to start with...from the beginning... if they went any slower, then Apple would really go backrupt
There wasn't anything about being careful with 10.5.2 either. And there is good reason for this. Microsoft's QA teams really suck at integration testing.
Here's a complaint: Windows lovers always tout the fact their chosen OS has to work with so many different kinds of hardware, which makes it so much harder to get everything perfect. But, the problems I hear about are almost always software-related. What gives? The reality is hardware developers are ultimately responsible for producing suitable drivers, not Microsoft. Microsoft provides a large number of drivers with the OS as a convenience, but it is doubtful many, if any, of the non-generic drivers are written by Microsoft. So, why is it so hard for Microsoft to make a stable and functional OS? The hardware argument is bunk. And the real problem with Windows is Microsoft's QA teams. They cannot even seem to get regression testing done properly. No wonder people are nervous about upgrades and holding off forever on Vista. No one knows if their software will still work. Yes, all of the wonderful Windows software. *gag*
Hey, cut them some slack. It is hard being an Engadget editor these days. The whole "no one wants Vista" argument gets really hard to sustain as the number of licenses climbs over 100 million. As more and more QuickTime and OSX security flaws are found, and patches are rushed out the door, the whole "Windows is so insecure" argument looks kind of weak. The large number of Leopard bugs, takes the wind out of their "why can't Microsoft code bug-free software like Apple" sails. All the hacking and cracking required to do anything useful with an iPhone is really devaluing the "Apple: it just works" argument. Now they can't even fall back to their "too bad Microsoft can't get SP1 out the door" jibe.
At this rate pretty soon they will have to fall back to just admitting that they think Macs are better because more brain-dead actors and celebutantes like them, and they want to be associated with the pretty people. Either that or the ever charming "if you can't understand why they are better, then there is no hope for you."
It is never nice to kick someone when they are down. Let them have their fun.
Since apple controls its own hardware, it is less likely to experience the same problems as Microsoft with so many flavors of hardware.
Also different kind of fan boys.
Keep in mind that Apple only has to code their OS for the hardware that they ship out for their own systems. There is A LOT more variability in the hardware of a Windows PC than in the hardware of a Mac, making it much more difficult, almost impossible, to create a "universally accepted/working" version of an update. Microsoft can't possibly test on every hardware configuration possible, and for the most part, they do a good job. Considering the amount of updates/patches/fixes that Microsoft releases, their success rate is pretty high. Yes, you tend to get more stable updating on a Mac, but they have a lot less updates to release and a lot less hardware to deal with.
Installing it now, wish me luck :)
Breathe in, breathe out!
as they say.......everyone has to take the plunge.
It's working great, took about an hour to install, everything seems a bit more responsive (could be psychosomatic, but who knows? :P) No problems, and my x64 system is running great still.
Now, where's the official download for 32-bit, eh?!?
Can't get it to show. Is it somehow country bound, I've got the UK version.
I'm in the UK and I'm downloading it now. Just loaded up windows update and it set it off. Sure you're not running a 32bit version?
That could be the problem...
What happened to neglecting the 64-bit community?
I comfirm this...Just noticed it and been downloading since!
Is it the final version? Or is it beta/gamma/RC2/3/whatever?
It's all right guys
maybe everything will all get better when Bill Gates retires real soon ...
and then the philanthropy world will go down
Wait, how much did Stevie give away last year?
P.S. Idiot.
im in the UK and i dont see the update!!!!
I have the V668 Evaluation version installed at the moment that was released a while back... do i have to take that version off first???
Yes you have to uninstal the evaluation version then you will be able to instal SP1.
how?? i cant seem to find it anywhere to uninstall the RC version of Service pack 1!!
never mind haha, think i found it!!
Finally some love for the often neglected x64 users (myself included). ;)
No kidding. As someone earlier said, MS should only have release the x64 version of Vista. That would have forced everyone to supply x64 drivers, and Vista can't run on anything no x64 capable anyway, plus it's backwards compatible (mostly) with 32-bit.
You think you've had it bad - I'm an XP x64 user.
Windows 7'll be out before I see SP3 :-(
Just running a back-up. It is 711mb which seems quite large. I had an optionly ATI updateavailable when I checked to see if SP1 was out, refreshed and now it just shows SP1. Looks like it refuses to let you do any other updates until you get SP1.
It wasn't available for me when you guys first posted this, but it is now.
Funny thing is the size of the update is listed as "120.0 MB - 711.6 MB"
The x64 SP1 is almost twice as large as the 32-bit version, probably due to it including both 64-bit and 32-bit libraries (for compatibility purposes). This would explain said range of size.
Back-up is taking ages, thankyou slow Vista file transfers.
My laptop keeps dying when I try and make a back-up Windows Explorer is bugged to shite. I can't even get to the stage where I can download SP1 because I can't make a back-up without the whole laptop freezing up.
Start>>Control Panel>>Programs and Features
Click on ‘Turn windows features on or off’ on the left side of the screen
Uncheck ‘Remote Differential Compression’
Thanks, but I got there in the end I decided in the end to just do a straight file copy with Good 'ol Ctrl+C and it's buddy Ctrl+V, that seemed to do the trick.
I was under the impression for most of the time that Vista under development, that Vista was supposed to deliver us to the promised land of full 64-bit end-to-end OS and software. Then I learned about the 64-bit version of XP, and that Vista would also be 32-bit. What's more, there has been little migration to 64-bit for applications, save high-end graphics/animation software, and other number crunchers. WTF happened? Hasn't been plain for years that we have to go this route, and better sooner than later? My hardware has been waiting for years now, but certain key applications haven't migrated, or various drivers can't be found, for their XP 64 or Vista 64. Aargh.
Tell that to Canon and Sony, two photo and video manufacturers who are shitting all over x64 users.
I want to increased memory for photo and video editing, but neither company thinks that's a good idea, for whatever reason. Thanks assholes.
I agree completely.
I actually got my Rebel XT home and plugged it in to Vista x64. And honestly, I had trouble believing I couldn't find 64-bit drivers. It seemed almost surreal. I frantically scoured the net only to end up frustrated and confused.
Ironically.. I ended up just plugging it into my Mac to grab pictures until I can pick up a CF card reader.
Yes, I wanted to go to XP 64, but MS said XP was to be discontinued, so I tried to migrate to Vista. Forget Vista 64,- nothing available, so I tried Vista 32. My HP scanner and printer wouldn't work. What is so complicated about these drivers that MS could not make the old drivers work. I checked HP - no plans for Vista, but a push to buy all NEW Vista compatible scanners and printers. They tried that crap back when XP came out; it's a complete con. I've since sworn off HP, and am planning on a Mac for my next computer. I'm still XP 32, and I've never met anyone who can give me a convincing argument as to why Vista exists at all.
I've got x64 home premium and do not see SP1 in my update. Maybe it's Ultimate only at the moment?
x64 is getting something?...first!
I have a dream!!!
Home Premium x64 and am downloading now. Didn't backup, but I doubt I'll have any major problems
Yeah, I don't see it either, which is odd. Maybe they accidentally put it out there?
Installed this morning at the prompt, took about 23 minutes start to finish. Seems fine so far, I noticed already some changes like the prompt with defragging you can select which logical volumes to defrag. Also changed the interface for RDP, where you can specify an account/credentials at the initial connection screen to log onto, and also now warns you with a popup (you can check to never show again) if you connect to a non Vista/Server 2008 box, that it cannot verify the machine account on.
it always had the prompt for RDP.
I support thousands of RDP customers.
You probably turned it off under advanced tab before and forgot.
No...I use RDP numerous times a day, from the run line - mstsc /console to be specific, due to the nature of the servers I and my team connect to. I am highly familiar with RDP. There is the chance that it was never setup to appear this way in Enterprise edition which I run, and SP1 either reset a reg entry.
I would always get the popup warning it was a less secure connection and confirm I wanted to connect anyway. This is a different popup with a check box to never show again. Likewise, the GUI for RDP now shows the domain\username it will be using to connect to the device below the dropdown box where you can select the last 10 devices you connected to.
I'm in Canada and I've got the Dell Version of Vista Ultimate x64 but i don't see it.
SP1 installed without any problems. I didn't have any compatebility problems. On the other hand, I did not "feel" any speed increase or decrease whatsoever.
It might not show up at first. I had to hit the "Check for Updates" button in windows update a couple of times, and it popped up.
Installing now.
Did that. It still tells me that my "Windows is up to date".
i hope somebody can help me, i've vista ultimate 64bit, running on my laptop and i grabbed the evaluation copy of SP1, how do i take remove it, without doing an uninstall of the whole OS? is it possible?
Check on the Microsoft website where your got RC1 from.
In add/remove programs -> click the link in the left pane which says "View installed updates" -> select the RC, and uninstall.
From Windows Update applet -> "View Update History" in left pane -> Click "Installed Updates" from the top of this pane, select RC and uninstall.
I've had the official Vista SP1 x64 release for over 3 weeks now. Nothing too new.
Could somebody tell us if the build number is the same as the leaked sp1 RTM (About page and registry)
Vista really is terrible...I refuse to support it / release it here at my work until they slim it down some. It's too bloated...
Frank, even you are clearly a troll posting flame bait, I'm going to suggest you use vLite if you want to slim it down yourself.
My build number is 6001 for the SP1 update that went out today for Vista x64
All I really wanted was the build number from the about page, and if possible the internal build number, that is in the registry, I think its in local machine / microsoft / windows nt...I didn't need for it to turn into a utter flame war
P.S. I have a Vista box and a Macbook Pro...
Got it installed without any issues, most noticeable differences are my wifi connected instantly which it didn't do before, and memory usage on startup as dropped from about 49% to 39%, can't complain with that.
Windows could not search for new updates Error code 80072EE2 no SP1.
I installed it last week via the 'unofficial' method to get it to show up in Windows Update. After the download was finished and it actually started installing, it took about 20 minutes start to finish. Overall, the entire system seems snappier. I'm pretty happy with SP1 so far.
I had to request "check for updates" twice and then it appeared. Started downloading the 122MB pretty fast (6Mibps) and then stalled almost immediately. In my (painful) experience, it's just best to leave it alone and grab some coffee (a watched pot, etc.) At least I have multiple computers so tying this one up for the rest of the day isn't a train smash :) Gotta love how a Core-2-Quad can be crippled for hours by a simple install :)
Don't know how anyone's getting in in under 30 minutes; end-to-end it just took shy of 2 hours for me.... Cable not the bottleneck - network was static most of the time. At least once downloaded and underway, the "Stage n of 3" showed actual percentage progress in 1-2% increments so I knew something was happening.
File operations don't have a whole lot to do with your CPU, that's not the bottleneck, it's your disk subsystem.
I've got Vista x64 on a 4gb, core2duo e6400, on a recently-defragged Raid0 subsystem with 2x seagate 7200rpm sata 3.5gb/s 80gb drives. File operations are really quick on this system (definitely noticing improvements w/ sp1), so the install process after the d/l was complete was definitely under half an hour.
Yeah, I've been worried about my disk system for a while; I had Vista-32 on a RAID(1 not 0) using the h/w controller; didn't have the spare disks when I built it for 64; I've been thinking of going RAID-0 (probably +1) for a while as disk throughput sucks on my box. It's defragged and a 7200 RPM SataII 320G, but it's also reasonably full (over 90%) so that slows it down too. Guess I'm in for another re-install some time :) My case is also out of SATA power; I really really really need a NAS to get all my data out of the box and in another room anyway; it's sounding kinda industrial in there! :)
But the download speed was still very low. M$ need to beef up their edge caching.... or add some at all ??
Anyway, SP1 installed and I've seen no problems.
I've just installed it, after about an hour of waiting. I then had to leave it for another half an hour, whilst the ".NET Optimization" process gobbled up 60% of a 3ghz E6750 processing power.
Two things have happened that have annoyed me. The first is absolutely no noticable performance increase. The second is the removal of the Network icon from the bottom right without asking. I can't enable it again either (it's greyed out, along with everything else apart from the clock option in taskbar properties).
Anybody else have this issue?
My network is still selectable. Not grayed out at all.
i am having the same issue with the .net optimization process running at 50% of the cpu and i have the same CPU.
(Sorry to double post)
Also, I just noticed that my memory usage has gone from 1.1gb to 2.3gb (out of 4gb) since I installed SP1. How on earth can it possibly want an extra 1.2gb of memory? :|
Not showing up for me and I have x64 Ultimate :(
Installed in about 30 min, no problems. Vista Home Premium 64bit.
So does anyone know if I need to install any previous updates before I see SP1? So far I have a fresh install, but I'd rather just install SP1 and not have to deal with all these minor updates before it.
Mine required me to install all the latest roll-ups before it showed for download via windows update.
Installing now on my Vista box at home, since I was away I initiated it using Remote Desktop. Hopefully it'll be done before I get home.
Note: There's a update you have to install before you see SP1, be sure you install that first and restart your computer.
@Neal: Thanks for the info.
@Thomas P: Which update do you remember? I've been reading that some sort of registry hack was needed, but this was during the RC's.
It was a security update labeled as important, I'm currently rebooting my Vista box, so it'll be a second before I'll be able to reconnect to my system.
NM found the info I needed from technet. Thanks guys.
Okay Time to hit the "Next" button on Vista SP1 x64.... *Holds Breath* Oh wait, its only a VM session. *Hits button with great haste*
damn, i just bought a laptop and stuck with the 32 bit version. is going 64 bit really so much better? will it make a difference for typical internet/office type use?
I use 64bit a lot. 1.) Because I just like the latest and greatest of high-tech and 2.) because the limitations of 32-bit have been a great bottleneck especially with all this new bloatware out.
eh.... In Bellevue, Wa. Running Vista Ultimate x64 | No updates... no extras... no SP1... a disappointment
I had to check for new updates a few times before it finally found it.. just keep trying.