Microsoft signals some improvements in Windows Vista SP2, still not moist and chewy
By Darren Murph 
posted Oct 25th 2008 11:55AM
posted Oct 25th 2008 11:55AM
posted Oct 25th 2008 11:55AM
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.
Well... If anyone ever expected a Windows service pack to include anything truly enthralling, then I want whatever it is they're smoking.
I've never had major problems with VISTA on my dv6835nr. But, everynow and then Internet Explorer simply stops working or my wifi is dropped.
That's either cause of IE or because of my crappy Actiontech Verizon Fios router which doesn't even work with my Xbox360's wifi adapter.
@Flashpoint. Probably wouldn't hurt to upgrade your broadcom WLAN card in your laptop to an Intel 3945ABG from Ebay for about $14 shipped or 4965AGN for $25.
Jughead
...but that won't change the fact my Actiontech doesn't work with my 360's wifi adapter. :-(
Flashpoint...those routers are pieces of shit. google for a tutorial to create it into a bridge so you can use a different router and still use VoD (if you're a FIOS TV customer). Otherwise follow the other tutorial for setting it up in a normal bridge mode.
@Jughead, you gotta be crazy wanting to go with Intel's WLAN solution when you can go with Atheros!
You do realize the throughput performance differential is HUGE between the two (favoring the Atheros solution) and not to mention I can show you so many 2100/2200BG out there (and I know they are old) that have connectivity issues because of Intel's world famous drivers!
@Jughead, you gotta be crazy wanting to go with Intel's WLAN solution when you can go with Atheros!
You do realize the throughput performance differential is HUGE between the two (favoring the Atheros solution) and not to mention I can show you so many 2100/2200BG out there (and I know they are old) that have connectivity issues because of Intel's world famous drivers!
The reason for getting blase about SP2 is simple: For those who care about such things, Vista is fast becoming an afterthought now with MS banging on the drums for Win7, which is actually the real SP2.
@Flashpoint
update the firmware.
@flashpoint
ditch ie go firefox or even chrome beta they both work batter and faster than IE
Once again it is proven that lately it has become "cool" to hate Apple.
If you retards care to learn, OSX users do NOT pay for service packs. Service packs are 10.5.x releases and we are currently upto 10.5.5.
Oh and why arent they up to OSX 11? Thats the most stupid comment ive ever heard. Just because Windows gives its products a different name each time doesnt make them better....
I usually dont even read comments relating to Apple on Engadget because there will always be SOMEONE saying "what another Apple story?" and then getting high ranked for it.
Adderz, WTF? Seriously? There isn't one single comment about Apple in the post you replied to.
@ Flashpoint
Kind of ironic, from your name, but that would be Flash Player crashing IE 99% of the time.
At least they are giving customers the option of using Blu-ray on the OS if they want. No bag of hurt here.
You're right, Apple sucks, and so do their fanboys. Vista has been working great for me for 6 months. I don't know what everyone is complaining about. Engadget is such a total Apple tool. I also hate those stupid PC & Mac ads, and Apple hardware is way overpriced. And Windows Mobile is without a doubt the most joyous mobile computing experience you can find. I love choice, and open ecosystems. Thus, I love Microsoft. Bill Gates is the mostly saintly human to ever walk the planet, unlike Steve Jobs who only cares for himself. I dream of swimming in Steve Ballmer's man sweat. And Windows Vista Ultimate Edition is so TOTALLY worth $400.
*waits to be ranked up into the stratosphere*
@ Quix
I paid $30 for Vista Ultimate... Woot for student prices.
Also, this is the bluest, most highest ranked comment thread I've ever seen...
I was referring to the next thread. sorry...
Oh, I would've bought vista ultimate if I wasn't a student. Yes, $400. Why? Because I really like Vista.
\preemptive reply comment strike
You can get Vista Ultimate for like $170.
Yeah I yawned, at this article. You are bashing a service pack because it's only improving the OS? Interesting, I thought that is what service packs were for. If this were an Apple update Engadget would be peeing it pants over how great it is.
How come there is a way to rank users but not articles.
Sigh.
They would not only drool all over it but glaze over the fact that customers will end up playing $100 plus for what is effectively a service pack.
Spot on zebb.
Engadget's got its nose so far up Apple's rear end it's become embarrassing these days.
It's a useful update for millions of users. It's free. Grow up Engadget.
I completely agree. This service pack is actually adding useful features. I'm surprised they're throwing in new stuff like Bluray support and improved search, MS didn't have to do that. Service Packs are just supposed to be collaborative patches and bug fixes.
Why doesn't Engadget criticize how each 'new' OS of Apple's is merely a "service pack." They can't do that because Apple said Leopard had over "300 new improvements!" and a visual overhaul. Nine years later and they're still only on 10.5? Where's OS 11 Apple?
Another agreement here. This is a service pack, not a feature pack, and as such you wouldn't expect any major new things to play about with, just general tweaks and improvements.
I mean if you took your car in for a service, would you be disappointed if they didn't slap a turbo charger and massive rims on it?
What's interesting is that Engadget state that Vista still needs some work and then don't actually state what any of the issues that supposedly need work are.
Come on guys, this is getting silly.
Amen. The updates look pretty good, and I bet they'll work (unlike that other OS). Now if my G1 would just get its Bluetooth upgrade I'll be all set.
Yeah, I will no longer bother reading this site anymore.
Engadget has lost a reader what with their pervasively ostensible biases -- it's truly pathetic.
Time to go back to my other sources for Tech News while Engadget editors partake in their Apple orgies over here.
It's true!
I love Engadget but the second that Blu-Ray drives even become an option in most Macs i'm sure the entire internet (including Engadget) will have three consecutive babies in excitement.
I think Microsoft needs to just hold everything back. MAke it so Blu-Ray drives don't work with Windows until they officially support it. Let's see what kind of reaction that garners compared to what kind of reaction Apple is getting right now for doing the same.
I agree Zebb. I also think it's ironic that Engadget bash MS for fixing Windows when they can't even get the comments system on their own site working correctly.
People talk about bias towards Apple but all I see is relentless Apple bashing day in day out by Windows users.
As for Blu-Ray burning, It wasn't to long ago you same Windows users were bashing Blu-Ray saying it's on borrowed time due to digital downloads citing the XBox in particular. Now it's great because Microsoft has included burning capability. Make your minds up.
HAHAHA Quote of the day!
"I also think it's ironic that Engadget bash MS for fixing Windows when they can't even get the comments system on their own site working correctly."
thanks Jakem!
Enough from you tards on how each major OS X release is the equivalent of a Windows Service Pack. Bullcrap. As a Windows and OS X user, I'm fully aware what each entails, and they are in no way equivalent. I didn't notice any real feature additions (or major interface improvements) in XP SP2, for example, but there were lots of actual new features in Leopard. Sorry that the whole 10.3, 10.4, 10.5 thing is confusing to you, but those of us who actually use OS X know these are major version updates, not mere Service Packs.
And I pay $129 for a new version of OS X with new features. How much do you pay for Windows Vista Ultimate Edition?
Your lame talking points grow tiresome.
Engadget commenters got their noses so far up Microsoft's rear end it's become embarrassing these days.
Now vote me down, Redmond Horde. Vote me down.
I would give Apple praises once they can run their OS on thousand of configuration Vista can run on. I'll even praise Apple if it can run it half as stable as Vista. Bet once that happens...STFU.
Another one that agrees.
I've said on the last of Engadget's bashing Windows article, but I own an Apple Powerbook and an iPhone and the Microsoft hate is TOTALLY ridiculous here! I use Vista at work as a graphic artist and it is extremely stable. NEVER.. I repeat, I NEVER EVER have problems when doing high res digital paintings in Photoshop.
Engadget = Apple Fanboys. Grow up, seriously. It's embarrassing. :\
Well all of the bad things about engadget have already been stated, and even though I agree I don't think they need to be reiterated yet again. One good thing I can say about this site is that they don't seem to delete comments no matter how slanderous they are of engadget. So kudos to them for that at least.
if windows update is as frequent as ubuntu's...
bah, wake me up when its something from apple like OSX snow leapard
Hmmm...this is actually interesting to me. I'd like a review. It doesn't have to be from Engadget, but I'd still like to hear if Windows is doing any better.
A new Service Pack is just going to have some hot-fixes and nothing else... Its not going to improve the Blunder OS [Codename for Vista]
Hopefully Windows 7 would be a better version of XP....
@Jash
OK, tell my Vista doesn't work for YOU and why that's the case in, say, the last six months.
Or just shut the fuck up. Whatever.
Yeah, does windows have package management yet?
ethana2, wind0z3 isn't even awexome enough to have packages.
@ethan2
Does anyone care?
So... go on, what issues have YOU had?
Or shut the fuck up. Whatever.
I do quite like vista myself, I have a fast machine, and compares to the same computer with XP it flys on vista.
This is also because I have 6gig of ram, and XP64 is more hassle than its worth.
I haven't found anything that slow or annoying, And the whole "securities" tab with file permissions is.. good, sure, it takes a bit of time geting used to over XP, but XP is odd.. and not that easy to work out how todo things.
Vista is easier to use, once you drop all the habits you picked up from XP.
Note: I havent had a BSOD on vista, that wasnt todo with a incorrect OC, and when programs lock up, they dont take half of the system with them like vista, I have NOT had to reset my computer to get it working, I have NOT had to force power it off once.
Older games (we are talking 2000 here) have some issues, but as long as you install DX9 and run them in compatibility mode, they work perfectly.
So what enterprises are not upgrading? Business are always slow to uptake things, and if you know anything about IT and industry, is that you should never rip out a working system and fully replace it.
It would be interesting to know how many companies are trialing vista alongside XP/2k/NT ect.
SP's have also mostly been stuff like upgrading networking/speed/other small things.
Vista SP1 was the largest SP, and the only one so far that changed the kernel 6.0-->6.1.
We cant expect almost a new OS for free ;)
Actually that Security tab is there in 2000, XP Pro, XP x64, and all versions of Vista. It just isn't on by default on a lot of XP installs.
Also, Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 still use kernel 6.0 (just an updated version of it) - Windows 7 is going to use kernel 6.1 (figure *that* out).
Yeh, they have the annoying "easy sharing setup" thing on.
Which i found out how to turn off today, to get Vista and XP to talk, so I can do networked backups (I must say that the vista backup software is good).
And I didnt know that about the Kernel, you learn something new every day ;)
I installed Vista on my family PC and use it occasionally (mainly using my XP Laptop) and I have to say, it is a good system, only the "Windows needs permission" parts are rather annoying. Otherwise, it is quite stable, especially SP1, looks nice, is quite responsive (not IE though, nowhere near as good as Firefox), and not that much of a system hog if your PC is decently equipped.
So stop the hating, please, it's not like Macs are perfect, and Vista is FAIL.
Hateing is stupid, its a OS ;)
Use what you like, tisnt that important.
I just turned UAC off (the popups), I run with avast and no firewall sitting behind common sence and a router.
"I haven't found anything that slow or annoying"
Now I'm sorry but that means you are stupid or lying or high (or all of the above), a sensible even slightly critical person would even find annoyances in freaking nirvana after all :)
And yes I tried vista, and yes it has tons of annoying things, mostly design choices, and true if I let go of my 'xp habits' ie liking to have control of my OS/computer then perhaps I would be less annoyed..
And what hassle with XP64 are you referring to anyway?
And no my XP doesn't crash on me more than vista, and yes I had vista lock up and had to restart processes in it to get it to respond again on the same hardware where xp64 runs.
Also MS has tons of articles on how to fix crashes on malfunctions on vista and statistics on what makes vista crash the most etcetera, and fixes released every month for grievous issues, but I guess they are just big liars then eh?
I was commenting on my experience with vista, yes other people will have had worse, thats not my exp though is it?
XP annoyed me at first, I had to google stuff to find out how to make things work, I learned XP's odd way, then I moved to vista, and it was better, faster/ect on my hardware.
Yes, I dont have a slow PC, I have a fast one (Q6600@3ghz/6gig DDR2@990mhz, 10k rpm HDD), and I can say vista runs better for me.
I wouldnt put vista on a PC thats to slow for it.
I turned off UAC, just the same as i turned off things in XP that annoyed me, (security center/ect)
And XP64 seems to be VERY picky about drivers, it was never a mainstream os, more of a bodge job, which it was.
And your talking about fixes for crashes/patches/ect, vista has had less patches than XP.
XP was shit when it came out, vista wasnt great, but it was better than XP pre XP2.
We are still comparing a OS thats done with patches/fixes ect, to one thats "new".
We will all love vista, and hate the idea of WM7 at this rate ;/
And again, this is just my experience with vista!