Windows Vista SP2 RC may be in the hands of testers as we speak
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted January 30th 2009 3:03PM
posted January 30th 2009 3:03PM
Sure, the big hubbub's been Windows 7 (give us some time and we'll figure out how to install it on a toaster!) but Microsoft is betting that quite a few folks will be stranded in Vistaland (Vista Town? Vista Village? The dreaded Vista Flats?) for some time to come, and they'll need provisions -- like blankets, candles, water, and service packs. According to Tech Arp, Windows Vista SP2 RC is meeting testers sometime this week as an escrow build, which means that the public could see this thing as soon as early Q2 this year. You've been warned...[Via Computerworld]
> I hated XP. The blue screens, the freezes
'Dear Penthouse Letters...'
You must be pretty lucky, since I've used XP for ages, and Ive had over 300 bluescreens and I'm not even kidding.
I do alot of video/game/art work and such, and play a ton of games, I have XP installed on several machines (or did, when they were all running) and it died practically all the time.
Right now I'm running vista 64-bit and it's crashed plenty, and at school on the new Dell XPS's I got a bluescreen dumping the physical memory and lost an hour of work. At home, Vista overall sucks... I have to spend 20 minutes to hack around to play my old games (homeworld, homeworld cataclysm & homeworld 2) and stuff like that (cataclysm ran at 5FPS before i started messing with it!) Overall an annoying experience.
I'm unable to use ubuntu right now, because there's no driver for my wireless usb thing I'm using while im living at my current location, but that will change soon.
Windows 7 looks much faster an stable... I dunno if I'll buy it though. It'll all depend on the backwards compatibility for me, because vista failed horribly in that respect for me.
My computer is a quad core Q6600 w/ 8gb ram, nVidia 9800GTX with a 700 watt power supply running at 32 degrees celcius.. no problems with the hardware, and the other day my firefox couldn't even play a standard resolution video in fullscreen at 1920x1200 on my 24" monitor without choking and gagging. On my freaking quad-core! It took me 30 mins to fix the stupid problem.. Things like this are counter productive and should be fixed FAR before the product goes to market. Service packs won't cut it anymore... You can't bake half a cake, sell it as a full cake to a customer and tell them to pick up the other half next tuesday.
-Jaredu
I'm sorry, was Windows Millennium actually an OS? I thought it was just another service pack for Windows 98 that sucked and that we had to pay for.
I think you are totally clueless:
1. Windows ME was a separate release, not a service pack.
2. Windows 98 did NOT suck, it was a pretty decent consumer OS for it's time.
Actually Leo I'm thinking you're a bit clueless not to be able to spot the sarcasm in my post regarding WinME being a SP for Win98. I used Win98 and you can rave about it all you want but I was not too impressed. The first OS I would have even considered raving about was Win2000.
While Win98 wasn't GREAT it was a decent OS and 98 SE was pretty good. Although I think we can all agree WinME was crap and Windows XP was basically a prettier Windows 2000.
I'm with Dave on this one. I could not stand to use Windows until 2000 came out. 3.1/95/NT4/98/ME were all terrible.
PSA: Windows 7 is the follow-up to XP
Vista is in a different Window's family (the same one as good ole ME)
I don't find it fair to hate on 7 for being like vista when it's NOT.
Windows 7 takes the stability of XP and adds a little Vista flavor to it, and a new taskbar (which is pretty sweet)
"Are you telling me there's not one condo available in all of Del Boca Vista?"
What the hell are you talking about?
7 is based off the Vista kernal. A kernal which is totally different than XP.
It's "kernel".
You are right. My mistake. Kernaaaaaal!
KERNAL is the version of Vista for the commodore 64
Vista minus
http://www.tgdaily.com/html_tmp/content-view-41263-108.html
equals 7
O NOES!
Now hackers will have access to all my sensitive data I keep on my beta install partition!
/facepalm
you sir are an idiot
Someone's a little behind here, as it's now Friday and this build was released to testers earlier in the week. I downloaded, but didn't install, it.
Matt Ferens I have got to believe that you had some weird install of XP going on to get those BSOD all the time on XP. I personally have like 10 computers networked at home and when they all were running XP times were good and I'm not sure if I ever remember even one BSOD. It wasn't until after I introduced a few new machines into the setup that were running Vista that I had both BSOD (on some of the Vista machines) and networking issues galore. I have got to believe that 99% of the public has had a similar experience as me and not the BSOD on XP experience that you speak of.
You want me to think your single experience is more valid than any other single user's experience. I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.
I didn't mean that XP died every ten minutes. It is a fact that Vista has blue-screened on me. It is also the truth that XP blue-screened far more times per year than Vista has. I'm in no way saying XP is unstable. I'm saying that in my experience, Vista is more stable, easy to install, and overall well-rounded than XP.
My original post was meant to say that since Vista was such a big jump forward from XP, I was excited and motivated to get it as soon as it launched. However, since 7 is not such a big jump at all, I'm not motivated and may end up waiting.
Finally, I HIGHLY doubt that 99% of the public has had a worse experience in Vista when compared to XP. A friend of mine switched to Mac because of his experience with XP. After Vista launched, he told me that had Vista come out a year earlier, he would still be a PC user. Any arguement of XP vs Vista is totally user-experience biased. I had some nasty times with XP right before I switched to Vista, so that probably taints the other years of happy times, but in any case, that is my experience, and that is what forms my opinion.
BSOD = cheap hardware parts... pick a good seller and you'll be ok. Ive never had a single BSOD since Ive installed XP. A few cracked softwares crashing on me of course but if you are legit, no problem at all. On the other hand, My G5 softwares are constantly crashing on me... every single day I use it.
we will see
Vista Ville?
Vile Vista?
This time, maybe SP2 will allow my Dell XPS PC to boot up in less than 90 seconds?
Wow!
Sounds like you need a new computer or at least to format it. I boot vista x64 in less than 20 seconds on my desktop and vista 32 bit in about 30 seconds on my xps 1330.
Hey all the guys at the top of these comments need to get a life. If you have any idea how hard programming is i would say that microsoft it doin really well with windows vista and 7. They are doing really really well because every time you guys come around and do all this stupid stuff tellin how bad their doin, that probably makes them a little pissed because you guys think that they can write this stuff in like 2 days. If they release the sp2 then thats gonna be a big improvement for vista. Personally i love vista and i wouldnt have any other platform unless it was OSX with an apple computer, but other than that their doin great. but i guess you guys are pessimest's only looking at whats wrong with vista and 7. I have a dell with a hp printer and i run about 7 games on it and it never has failed to keep moving. vista is way better than xp.
programing is not THAT hard... takes a while to learn but come on an OS that uses 800mb of ram doing nothing is a complete joke... Word 97 only required 16mb ram and windows was running in 8mb or less back then if you think computers have gotten 100x more complex since then you are off your rocker
there may be a broader range of HW but each indivudual PC has a limited set of HW meaning even today a modern OS could take as little as 24mb or so quite reasonably even with a snazzy looking interface
DOWN WITH BAD PROGRAMMING!!!
Yes, programming an operating system is that hard and it only gets worse when you factor in the legacy windows API that is a nightmare; if you're familiar with that API then you know that there are more than a few bugs in it that are at this point unfixable since people even program with them at this point rather than programming around them. If you think programming is not that hard, then your experience is most likely with web development where you make a pretty GUI with XHTML rather than doing data transformations. There is EASY programming, but that in no way means that programming is easy; just because after ECE 101 you can build a NAND gate doesn't mean that speculative execution is simple to implement, and just because you can one line "hello world" in PHP doesn't mean that you'll be writing a C compiler using VLIW for an Itanium chip by the end of the week.
Site is a re-link to Goatse.cx
I'm not actually sure that it is, but it seems a good way to get this fuckface banned.
I can't wait to Vista behind us and bring on Windows 7 because it's going to be the real Vista!
Are they giving us back the old windows XP start menu in vista(not the dumb classic 9x one)?
"Takes another crown" ?? The performance differences evidenced in benchmarking dont really represent a revolution in end user experience. If it werent for the differences in media center and tablet input, Its hard to justify forking out for something you can do with your vista disc and vlite ;)
Yes I've already seen it. It's called Windows 7
Holy Sheep Shit my friends let me remind you summer is here and their is much better things in life then spending a whole 30 minutes on your lap _ick . the sun is up now for 11 hours here and will be for 14 hours very soon. the snow is almost gone.
7 will be here in blum for the winter of 11, GET OUT SIDE AND ENJOY LIFE!