Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

First Vista Service Pack Due Second Half of 2007

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the patchity-patch dept.

Windows 137

HuckleCom tipped us to an article on the Dark Reading site, stating that plans are already in the works for the first Windows Vista service pack. The pack is slated for release sometime in late 2007, and will target security improvements and Quality of Life issues that may spring up between January and the pack's release date. Microsoft is already looking for volunteers to help them test it. According to the email sent to Technology Adoption Program members, in order to get in on the ground floor IT shops will have to 'deploy pre-release builds into production environments and report back on the results.' As the article observes, Microsoft may be asking for a lot from their customers. Candidate releases of XP service packs had extremely deleterious effects when initially rolled out. There is no firm word for when in the year this pack will be released.

cancel ×

137 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yeah, right. (4, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759676)

'deploy pre-release builds into production environments and report back on the results.

That would be funny, if it weren't coming from Microsoft.

No No No (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17760068)

thats simply not true. typical liberal entitlement mentality

Re:Yeah, right. (4, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760218)

'deploy pre-release builds into production environments and report back on the results.
That would be funny, if it weren't coming from Microsoft.

That would be funny, if that weren't the terms under which we were all already running Windows XP.

There, fixed that for you.

yeah, but don't you mean the... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17759690)

dupity-dupe department?

Quick Release? (5, Insightful)

Lithdren (605362) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759720)

Seems to me they're releasing a Service Pack pretty quick for an OS.

"I think i'll wait till they relase SP1 for Vista before I upgrade"

better wait for SP2!

Re:Quick Release? (4, Insightful)

Vicissidude (878310) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759854)

Seems to me they're releasing a Service Pack pretty quick for an OS. "I think i'll wait till they relase SP1 for Vista before I upgrade" better wait for SP2!

The fact that everyone waits for SP1 is the exact reason why they're releasing that first service pack so quickly.

Re:Quick Release? (5, Informative)

Lithdren (605362) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759974)

Excatly my point.

How much could they possibly fix this quick in an OS as monolithic as Vista? not much is my guess. Its more of a combover for people who dont want to get burned like they did with XP when it first released.

Its XP that really made people realize how horribly buggy software could be on release. How many corporate offices wont upgrade software to something untill after a particular period of proven reliabilty on the market now? My guess is quite a bit more since XP.

And how many of those set the requiremnt to be after X number of major upgrades? A Service Pack would qualify to most people as fairly major.

Re:Quick Release? (2, Interesting)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760192)

I would hope they fix some of the issues with vista.. although some are just plain UI inconsistencies.

My pet hate being you can't put an icon in the taskbar for network devices any more, so you can't see visually whether you're locked onto wireless or wired (I switch between them a lot when moving around on the laptop). Disabling the wireless has gone from a right click to 3 dialogs and a UAC prompt.

There's also a process that keeps scanning the files on the disk. Not windows search (disabled that, as it runs the HD at 100% when the machine is idle, stopping the powersaving from working) but another process that's part of svchost.exe - picks random files too.. never seen a pattern to it.

There are a few API bugs that are just plain wierd too.. you can code around them but they're subtle enough to break non-obvious stuff.

Re:Quick Release? (2, Interesting)

FuzzyMan45 (451645) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760388)

Regarding the harddrive usage, i've disabled windows defender, auto defragging, windows update and it doesn't seem to make much of a difference either. When you disabled indexing, did you disable _all_ of the directories? There's a modify screen that you can remove like 5 directories. After doing this, it cut the HD usage a great deal but every once in a while it'll spike up and just think to itself for a while... i've never figured it out.

Re:Quick Release? (4, Informative)

VertigoAce (257771) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760538)

Actually, there's a very simple reason for Microsoft to release a service pack in the second half of 2007. That happens to be the exact same phrase used to describe the release of Longhorn server. In case you didn't know, Longhorn client (Vista) and Longhorn server are built from the same codebase. Vista SP1 is primarily the result of an extra year of development to the common OS components, plus any client patches that didn't make it in time for RTM.

The point is that most of the work will have been done for the server release already. They may as well package up a new build of the client since it will inherit any improvements from the server.

Re:Quick Release? (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760730)

Its more of a combover for people who dont want to get burned like they did with XP when it first released.

So ... it's for people who have lost most of their hair, but are intent on maintain a youthful image?

Re:Quick Release? (2, Informative)

fithmo (854772) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762428)

How much could they possibly fix this quick in an OS as monolithic as Vista?

Vista went in to RTM in November, so releasing SP1 mid 2007 will leave at 6 to 8 months for bug fixes. Considering how long Vista was in development, and (more importantly) knowing Microsoft, you can assume that there was a lot of polishing that got pushed aside in a rush to just finally get the damn thing out and over with.

Additionally, since Longhorn Server is still under development - and releasing Beta 3 next month or so - there's probably still lots of work being done on the client/server relationship. Changes and bug fixes could be made to the server edition that will require slight changes to clients.

So really it's fairly reasonable to think that there would be at least some changes worth making.

Re:Quick Release? (1)

dan828 (753380) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760216)

Actually, I think that they are releasing the service pack so fast because they decided they were shipping what they had to businesses in November because certain software assurance contracts where up for renewal then. They spent a few months polishing up what they had and shipped it. Obviously, it wasn't in the kind of shape that they wanted it in, so the early SP should get it in to the shape they had hoped for at RTM without having to delay again.

And I'm using Vista as we speak, and though it's in better shape than XP at RTM, it certainly could use some work. It has a much better version of minesweeper by the way.

Re:Quick Release? (1)

Al Dimond (792444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760268)

Better minesweeper, 'eh? Can it play with triangular tiles (like xbomb)?

Re:Quick Release? (3, Informative)

TheGavster (774657) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761146)

When I first tried Vista, it was running in a VM and there were serious problems with the Minesweep implementation, actually: It was difficult to distinguish the zero tiles from unexplored tiles, and there was significant lag. It ran much better when I moved to actual hardware, but you wouldn't think that emulation would cause that big a performance hit for something like that.

Re:Quick Release? (2, Insightful)

AudioEfex (637163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760884)

The fact that everyone waits for SP1 is the exact reason why they're releasing that first service pack so quickly.

And the exact reason even a "power user" like myself isn't even entertaining the idea of upgrading to Vista anytime soon. When I say "power user", I mean a consumer with above-average computer skills, but I'm not a professional. I fix friends PC's, but I don't build them. I can make just about any OS or program do what I want, but I don't write them. So my opinion comes from being a user who does understand both sides of the equation to a certain extent.

As someone who does not operate systems in a business environment, I can't speak for the usefulness of Vista in those situations. However, for my personal use and the tasks I use computers for, I can't find a single compelling reason to move to Vista. Not a single positive, but many negatives; I'm still running some very useful hardware that is on USB1.1 and/or has to run on legacy mode on XP, and I have everything finally running perfectly as I want it - why in hell would I want to upgrade to an OS just to get all my old devices that are still perfectly good and useful to work all over again?

There is just no reason I can see to disrupt my life with a new OS that is going to be even more of a system hog than XP is. I know the conventional wisdom is to think, "Gee, guess it's time to upgrade to a new PC," but since I have no other reason to do so that would just be silly. I burn DVDs - my system does that flawlessly (especially since I just got a new LG external burner that is a Godsend on sale for $75). I use BitTorrent. I browse the web and check e-mail. I edit video and audio. None of this is going to get any easier via Vista, and in fact as outlined above much of it will get more difficult.

XP isn't going anywhere in my house. Hell, I still have a laptop running ME because it's the newest OS it can handle - but it still does the basic tasks I need just fine and it will continue to serve me for years to come (I've had it since 1997). Sure, the big PC gamers will have to upgrade eventually, but since I just play consoles these days (XBOX360 and Wii) that's not a reason for me.

MS is throwing the same party for Vista it threw for XP - better, more secure, blah, blah...we've been here, done that, and learned our lessons. All that said, as a consumer the fact that the first SP is already in the works makes me distrust the product even more, and further solidifies my choice that Vista is going to remain on the horizon for me instead of in my home for a lot longer than MS would like.

AE

Re:Quick Release? (0, Offtopic)

Columcille (88542) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761194)

Hell, I still have a laptop running ME

You lose your "power user" claims with that one - someone that voluntarily runs ME, the worst OS that has ever existed? I like XP and I plan to upgrade to Vista pretty quick because I've liked the pre-release versions, but I cringe any time I even hear about ME.

Re:Quick Release? (1)

AudioEfex (637163) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761898)

You lose your "power user" claims with that one - someone that voluntarily runs ME, the worst OS that has ever existed? I like XP and I plan to upgrade to Vista pretty quick because I've liked the pre-release versions, but I cringe any time I even hear about ME.

I know that's a knee-jerk reaction, but I think you miss my entire point : I have an old laptop that runs ME because it is not capable of running XP. All I use it for is to type word processing documents, play music, and occasionally jack it into the internet to check email on the road (but rarely use it online). So, should I just throw it out because the laptop isn't capable of running anything better than ME, and I don't have the time to learn to deal with Linux on it since the laptop meets my needs as it stands right now?

See, that's the point here, that if something isn't broke (yes, I know that in general as on OS ME is pretty weak, but IMHO it is still better than Win98 since this machine cannot run XP) why get rid of it? Besides, the laptop has sentimental value at this point (covered in old stickers), but again, that's irrelevant because it's still useful to me. The machine handles all the tasks I ask it to - and it's still got a beautiful LCD screen and even plays ROMs to boot.

This relates exactly to the topic at hand - people upgrading to Vista, and when. The computer market has grown beyond the "I need the newest best because some PC mag, blog, tech head, etc. told me this was the bestest!" I know people who still use machines with Win98 - do your grandparents who only use a computer to send and check email really need any more? These aren't people who are going to be hacked because their OS is insecure - they literally only email grandkids on the thing.

If Vista is going to work for you, more power to you! I honestly hope you enjoy it, and that it works out for you as you wish. For me, however, no application I use, or task I use my PC to complete, is going to be any better/faster/quicker if I upgrade to Vista. I just am not tempted in the least by "better! new! new!" unless it can do something for me just for the sake of being "cutting edge".

I've got enough to do these days without installing OS's for fun if they aren't going to add any functionality that is useful for me. I don't collaborate on projects with people on other continents, all my media already runs great over my home network, and I don't need that fancy new holographic super-conductive whatever interface that you only get on the expensive editions of Vista. I'm sure it's a nice OS and all, but unless I can add a single checkmark in the "what will this do for me" column, I'm going to hold-off on Vista until I get a free copy from MS on a new system - and maybe not even then.

AE

Re:Quick Release? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17762488)

I know that's a knee-jerk reaction, but I think you miss my entire point : I have an old laptop that runs ME because it is not capable of running XP. All I use it for is to type word processing documents, play music, and occasionally jack it into the internet to check email on the road (but rarely use it online). So, should I just throw it out because the laptop isn't capable of running anything better than ME, and I don't have the time to learn to deal with Linux on it since the laptop meets my needs as it stands right now?
If you have a machine that cannot run XP, don't even consider running a modern Linux on it. Seriously. The bloat is pretty bad nowadays. XP is lightweight by comparison. Yes, I'm aware of XFCE, but that still feels behind Win95.

Re:Quick Release? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17762708)

I'm going to hold-off on Vista until I get a free copy from MS on a new system - and maybe not even then.
When you buy a new system with an MS OS (which is pretty much everywhere thanks to their monopoly or unethical methods or whatever on computer manufactures), your still paying to MS. It's never free.

Re:Quick Release? (1)

AusIV (950840) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762250)

Doesn't anyone actually wait to hear how well something performs? I mean, if Product_X is getting great reviews, and it's something I'll use, I'm not going to wait until Product_X v2 is released (assuming the upgrade is free later). Likewise, if Product_X is getting horrible reviews, I'm not going to pick up Product_X v2 the day it's released.

Re:Quick Release? (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760082)

Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't Windows 2000 hit SP4 by late 2002?

Everyone expected this (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760222)

Remember that release developments overlap with their testing and trialling for stability reasons.

The first release was really just to get something out so that those who budgeted expenditure last year could still buy something.

MS software is never usable before SP1.

Re:Quick Release? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17760248)

Yes wait until SP2. I have heard too many horror stories from beta testers. And just wait until their broken DRM starts deactivating DVD drives and hard drives just because it became confused.

Not to mention I want to wait for the hackers to ferret out all the spyware that Micro$oft is putting into Fista. I want a machine that is secure...and that includes secure from Micro$oft too!

And there is no way I am going to trust their firewall to protect me. I'm going to run with a OSS if I have to port one myself! No telling what they are planning on letting through so that they can spy on you.

I really don't understand Micro$oft. They are actually pushing people to use Linux, OSX, or older versions of Windows by including so much spayware. Amazing!

Re:Quick Release? (2, Funny)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760264)

Maybe they are just adopting a release early, release often strategy

Re:Quick Release? (1)

evilkiksass (966414) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761860)

like linux? oh the negative karma /cringe

Re:Quick Release? (0, Redundant)

pallmall1 (882819) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762462)

Maybe they are just adopting a release early, release often strategy
Maybe it's just because Microsoft is run by customer-fucking scumbags.

Re:Quick Release? (2, Funny)

AArmadillo (660847) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760390)

I just updated my Linux kernel last week, and there's already a new version this week!! OMG!!!!! What is this world coming to?

Re:Quick Release? (2, Informative)

Columcille (88542) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761296)

Windows XP was released October 2001, XP SP1 in September, 2002. It sounds like Vista SP1 is going to be out faster than XP SP1 was, but not by a large margin.

WinXP (4, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759724)

I'm more interested in the next WinXP SP, as there are currently some 80 patches needed after a clean install of XP SP2. Yeah, I know all about all the goodies that help streamline installing them, but they are only patches to something Microsoft ought to be doing.

Re:WinXP (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17759772)

dont worry, as the article says "will target security improvements and Quality of Life issues", hence switch to Vista.. helps you stand on your feet

Re:WinXP (2, Funny)

empaler (130732) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759940)

What the hell is Quality of Life issues anyway?
I really have no idea. Maybe it is because I live in Europe.

Re:WinXP (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760158)

What the hell is Quality of Life . . .

What you don't get a positive experience of after installing Vista.

KFG

Re:WinXP (1)

AnnuitCoeptis (1049058) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760854)

not gonna happen, your service pack 3 is called Vista

Re:WinXP (1)

minvaren (854254) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760876)

If we're seeing a service pack for Vista this quickly, while XP SP3 has taken 2+ years to release... I'd say there's an 90% chance Microsoft releases another "security rollup package" for XP and calls it done. They did it before with Win2k - anyone remember SP5?

Fixes For Vista Already? (3, Funny)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759728)

Better late than never.

Re:Fixes For Vista Already? (1)

ErGalvao (843384) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759968)

or maybe "Better quick than sorry"... =;c)

Sweet deal! (4, Funny)

PingSpike (947548) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759786)

I can beta test Microsoft's software for them and all I have to do is potentially hose my production servers? Sign me up! Sign me up yesterday!

Re:Sweet deal! (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760094)

If you're running Vista as a server you're already stupid enough to run beta software on a production 'server.'

Re:Sweet deal! (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760110)

Sign me up! Sign me up yesterday!
You could use that new 'Time Machine' feature ... oh, wait ... wrong new OS. Sorry about that ... sorry about Vista too. :-(

Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (4, Insightful)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759804)

Releasing a service pack so soon after release is basically an admission on Microsoft's part that Vista was rushed out incomplete. All this means is that anyone planning their upgrade schedule should really count the release of SP1 as if it were the initial release of Vista (ie. wait at least 6-12 months on from that point to allow issues to be resolved). Yet another reason not to switch to Vista in the forseeable future.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (5, Insightful)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759904)

We all KNOW Vista is being rushed out incomplete. The problem really is twofold: that companies (and not just MicroSoft) rush out product before it is ready, requiring patches/etc, but for some unknown reason we all find the multitude of patches/etc acceptable. In some ways, the "dark days" of computing (pre-fast-internet) were the golden years. Either a company released a fully working product, and it thrived, or they released garbage, and the companies died in the process. Of course, there is no way that this process will change until we, the consumers, demand finished products at release. But somehow I dont think the sheeple out there will do that either. No matter how you look at it, the consumer loses now, and the consumers don't seem to care.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (4, Insightful)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759994)

Well that's one side of the coin. On the other side you've got other products that have been able to continue improving over the years and respond to changes in technology to extend their effective product lifetime - things that would otherwise have been provided as costly upgrades or "new versions" if it weren't for patching. Sometimes patches (and the fundamental expectation that they're free) can actually be a good way to get value for money from a product. Just not in this case.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (1)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760064)

Yeah, but thats not Patching in the sence we're talking about here...adding new/upgraded functionality for free is a Good Thing(TM). Fixing something that was broken to begin with isn't.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (1)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760704)

Yeah, but thats not Patching in the sence we're talking about here...adding new/upgraded functionality for free is a Good Thing(TM). Fixing something that was broken to begin with isn't.
- Oh absolutely. I'm not suggesting SP1 is in any way a positive thing, I'm just pointing out that patching in general isn't inherently a bad thing, even if some do choose to abuse it.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (2, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761244)

Of course, there is no way that this process will change until we, the consumers, demand finished products at release. But somehow I dont think the sheeple out there will do that either.

"Finished products," as Asimov remarked very early in the Foundation series, are the obsession of the decadent mind. You'll find a similiar observation in Parkinson's Law.

The modern OS distribution is always a work in progress. That is its fundamental strength and appeal. There is no loss to the consumer in a product that evolves and changes over time.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17760074)

Releasing a service pack so soon after release is basically an admission on Microsoft's part that Vista was rushed out incomplete.

First people were whining that they weren't releasing software fast enough. Now they're whining that they're rushing it out. Which is it? Do you honestly think that any piece of software is released bug free? I hope not. Therefore why are you surprised to hear that Microsoft already has a release date for SP1?

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (5, Insightful)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760640)

People are whining that Microsoft promised a major step forward, spent the better part of a decade in development, pushing back the ETA over and over again, and now after all that time they've produced something which has lost virtually all of the features that once made it interesting and somehow they still haven't finished the product properly. So you're asking if people are whining because it took too long or because they rushed it - both. It's far later than originally planned, far smaller in ambition than originally stated, and still unfinished. In other words people are whining because Microsoft haven't made good on any of the promises surrounding Vista (in all its guises) for the last half-dozen years.

I don't think anyone is surprised that they're releasing SP1 so soon. It's just disappointing that it's lived down to expectations.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (1)

xeromist (443780) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761164)

For some reason after reading your very well worded assessment of Vista I had the mental image of a turd covered in aero glass(vista, not your post). Just thought I'd share that.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (1)

pallmall1 (882819) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762552)

...I had the mental image of a turd covered in aero glass(vista, not your post).
And SP1 is the polish.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17760764)

If microsoft is slow releasing a service pack people bitch about being left out in the cold. If microsoft is fast about releasing a service pack people bitch about the quality of the product they have now. I don't get it, there seems to be a double standard. Oh, wait...this is slashdot after all.

Re:Vista SP1 (Read: Vista proper release) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17760888)

Yes, don't switch. It should really be called Windows for Idiots not Vista. They have removed features/configurability left and right. Aero sucks. A lot of OS windows (e.g. all Explorer windows) have an empty title bar (no icon on the left, no title string). Aero is quite sluggish even on my high-end machine (Core2 Duo 3GHz, Nvidia 7900GT, 8GB Ram). Lots of apps are not compatible. The font rendering is awful (MUCH worse than XP) if you don't use Cleartype. Graphics performance is much worse than XP for NVidia cards. The Unix subsystem SUA doesn't work well with the new account protection stuff (I gave up on it and and use Cygwin).

Stick with XP, no reason to upgrade unless you need to develop software for Vista.

Maybe a bit off topic but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17759820)

Anyone have a guess when patching won't be neccessary? I was thinking about waiting to start a business until they get this whole software thing figured out. I'm not sure I like it when uncle mega corp can do anything they want to my computer any time they feel like it.

They ultimate would be to hack windows update and send out a mass update to format everyone's drive or steal data if you want money.

Boy, now THERE'S a surprise! (2, Funny)

mmell (832646) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759832)

C'mon . . . everybody knows (or should) that any MicroSoft product should be considered "beta" until release of the next version (at which point, it becomes "obsolete").

Superior marketing by design. Brilliant!

Bah (3, Funny)

matr0x_x (919985) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759836)

I hate seeing the words Vista and Security in the same sentence

Re:Bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17759866)

"I hate seeing the words Vista and Security in the same sentence."

Then why did you write one?

Re:Bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17759976)

Unlike other OSes, Vista does not have good security.

Re:Bah (4, Funny)

Ruie (30480) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760164)

I hate seeing the words Vista and Security in the same sentence

Nonsense. In security discussions Vista means a particular kind of a very large hole.

Re:Bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17761006)

Why the hell is this flame bait??? Does anyone actually disagree with this given what we now know???

Few Takers (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759856)

I doubt they get any sane takers that are willing to risk *production* machines..

what the hell are they thinking?

Correct order (1)

erica_ann (910043) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759886)

At least they did not release the service pack before the OS was released this time....

"Quality of Life" == DRM (2, Insightful)

mpapet (761907) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759902)

Seriously.

I work in a small win32 shop and even we won't consider it for another couple of years.

The alternative my PHB is actually considering deploying 2003 server as a desktop. If you are used to thinking that Microsoft is very good stuff and find Vista generally bad, this kind of bizarre thinking takes hold. It is safe to assume that vista adoption is a forgone conclusion.

I make a decent wage babysitting Microsoft stuff. I specifically don't advocate any platform at work. That's my bosses decision. Though, if we switched to Linux I'm positive we'd do a whole lot less babysitting.

Re:"Quality of Life" == DRM (1)

sconeu (64226) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760014)

To be honest, I wouldn't mind a 2K3 server desktop. Granted, I don't need the server functions... I wish they'd released a 2K3 Workstation version.

Re:"Quality of Life" == DRM (2, Informative)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760226)

XP 64bit was basically that (although they'd shoved things like media player in there).

Re:"Quality of Life" == DRM (1)

Achromatic1978 (916097) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760324)

There are many many guides to setting 2K3 as a workstation - DX, etc. Most of them even manage not to be "h4cdc0re k-r4d d00dz!" style. I used to do this on my laptop.

Windows 2003 to XP Conversion Pack (2, Interesting)

Shawn is an Asshole (845769) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762824)

You could always install the Windows 2003->XP Conversion Pack [windowsxlive.net] . It's supposed to make the 2003 install behave more like XP.

The Vista Transformation Pack [windowsxlive.net] does a decent job (some visual glitches) of making XP look and act like Vista.

Re:"Quality of Life" == DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17762072)

Honestly...

What the fuck is wrong XP as a dekstop? Do you realize what a Win2k Server license costs in relation for the nearly the same functionality?

Ha ha ha ha (4, Interesting)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 7 years ago | (#17759956)

And by "second half of 2007" they mean, fourth quarter 2011. I love MS Project:)

I hope this is finally it! (-1, Troll)

pilbender (925017) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760022)

I hope this is going to be the last time we end up having to "deal" with this nonsense. It is my fervent hope that this OS will erode Microsoft into obsolescence for good. Then we can finally get to the business of using our computers for progress instead of being unnecessarily held back by ONE company.

Microsoft sucks a lot of time and resources from the world and it's high time they just "go away".

Re:I hope this is finally it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17761214)

I think Apple hopes this is true... Linux users hope this is true. I'm sure IBM, Sun, and many others hope this is true. I even know some die-hard Microsoft fans who don't see any reason to upgrade because of all the obvious reasons.


I wonder how Microsoft will deal with these new competitors? It's going to be fun watching their little propaganda machine spin up into high gear!

Re:I hope this is finally it! (1)

pallmall1 (882819) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762712)

I wonder how Microsoft will deal with these new competitors?
Legislation [wikipedia.org] .

Quality of Life and the environment (0, Offtopic)

Teun (17872) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760026)

I've not yet seen Vista in the wild but read up about it.

And I understand that even on a fast computer the CPU 'idles' at around 20%.
I imagine this is not really fitting in with the Bush government's drive to lower power consumption by 20%.
Yes I know the CPU is only a part of the power bill and Bush talked about cars but for the millions of systems that are going to be deployed just these DRM cycles might cost an extra power plant...

Back to the subject of Vista SP1, is this Quality of Life maybe a backing out of the DRM scheme now it's basically cracked anyway?

Re:Quality of Life and the environment (4, Informative)

praxis (19962) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760180)

Really 20%?! My Athalon 64 3200+ is using about 3% CPU for the search indexer background process (not usually indexing depending on how I set my power profiles depending on my current needs, I run it when actively using the machine and plugged into a wall outlet) and not much else. Turning off the search indexer has my task manager toggle between 0% and 2% (when taskmgr updates). Are there occasional spikes when the indexer *is* running and fetches a chunck of data, sure, but that's not idleing at 20%, that's a process processing.

Re:Quality of Life and the environment (3, Informative)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760294)

OTOH the resource monitor *does* take around 20%...

Methinks the people who made the 20% claim forgot to look at what was actually producing it.

Mine goes like:
DWM 2% (that's aeroglass AFAIK)
Task Manager 2% (you can discount that from normal running figures)

Lots of random stuff making it up to between 5% and peaking at 10% (not really a problem.. XP would peak at around the same level).

I'm not fan of vista by any means but CPU usage isn't its problem. *disk* usage... well that's a whole different story - until I switched off windows search the disk light was permanently on (*not* good for a laptop on battery). Still has the occasional burst of reading random files (something in svchost) that I need to track down/kill.

Don't believe the FUD (2, Informative)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760820)

I've not yet seen Vista in the wild but read up about it. And I understand that even on a fast computer the CPU 'idles' at around 20%.

I'm not saying Vista is all that great or anything, but you heard wrong. [fatalexception.org]
(This is running on a 3.4GHz P4, single core, 2GB RAM, nVidia 6600, Aero Glass enabled.)

Re:Don't believe the FUD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17762200)

If that's your Task Manager screenshot ... You are running 2 cores or HT.

vista 2.0? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17760112)

before everyone freaks out about a service pack, how often do new versions of Ubuntu or Fedora come out? Is there that much of a difference just because one OS calls it a service pack and one calls it a version?

Re:vista 2.0? (3, Funny)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760502)

Shh, they're having fun.

Re:vista 2.0? (1)

jZnat (793348) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761594)

We expect new versions of Ubuntu every 6 months. We don't expect the same of Microsoft (especially after the long XP to Vista upgrade time), so when they're so quick to patch, it's funny. Or something like that...

Re:vista 2.0? (1)

loconet (415875) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762452)

Yes there is a difference.

Release Early, Release Often is part of the core philosophy of Open Software (see C&B). It is how the model is designed to work naturally. Vista and all Windows versions before it do not have this model. If there is a release quickly after another, it is usually to fix a critical error. In this case, I am guessing SP1 will be used to add whatever didn't make marketing's 105th(?) deadline.

No real surprise (1)

overshoot (39700) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760224)

For quite a while the rule has been, "don't upgrade until the first service pack." With that in mind, SP1 has been moving earlier and earlier to drive upgrades.

I suppose that the day will come when SP1 arrives coincidentally with the official release -- or maybe even sooner.

SOX Compliance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17760250)

Umm.... Wouldn't any publicly traded company be in immediate non-compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley, simply by installing vendor software in production which is specifically unreliable, pre-release code? And could any interstate bank do this without breaking all kinds of FFIEC rules? And wouldn't any IT audit team automatically reject any proposal to do this?

Do they mean "User Experience"? (4, Funny)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760266)

The pack is slated for release sometime in late 2007, and will target security improvements and Quality of Life issues that may spring up between January and the pack's release date.

Quality of Life issues? I mean, I've heard Vista makes you a slave to DRM but I didn't think they meant that in a literal sense.

Vista Service Pak 1... (1)

Helldesk Hound (981604) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760310)

Service pak 1 - Vista as it should have been at initial release.

Sounds like Vista is the new Win95a

Re:Vista Service Pak 1... (1)

KingPunk (800195) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761634)

well, they did say that Vista is supposed to be to XP, as what Win 95a was to Windows 3.11 (for Workstations)

those who do not learn from the past, are surely bound to repeat it.
ironically, three generations later?

Well, kudos actually... (3, Insightful)

TheNetAvenger (624455) | more than 7 years ago | (#17760504)

#1) It is a good thing MS is taking updates seriously and scheduling them on a faster scale, it will also help to offset any found vulnerbilities in Vista RTM.

#2) If MS said they were releasing one in 2 years, everyone here would be complaing that MS is slow, doesn't care about users or software quality. Catch 22 Slashdot issue uh?

#3) At least MS won't be CHARGING for this as they have never done with previous service packs, that have in the past offered many updates and new features to the OS. This is something the Apple fans cannot claim, as Apple trickles out only security updates, and then charges for a real service pack update. This is easy math, compute XP Cost from 2001 with all the service packs, hell even add in the virus scanning software you had to buy, then compare this to your OSX prices in the same amount of time. So which company seems to be milking their customers? Also don't scream about all the new OSX features in each release, most are fixes or updates to the software included, or the famous spotlight, which MS also offers their desktop search for free to XP users.

So SP1 in the first year, good for MS for once, actually giving customers attention instead of internal infighting...

Re:Well, kudos actually... (1)

sqlrob (173498) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761094)

They do not charge for service pack updates. The service packs are the z of x.y.z

And if you yell, "but they're charging for minor releases then", remember, 2K = 5.0, XP = 5.1

Re:Well, kudos actually... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17761494)

What's easy math is that it took 6 years to Microsoft to release their next OS.
Very impressive, transforming this debacle into a good thing, you should have sold it to Microsoft's PR department.

It's really quite disingeneous to compare OSX releases to service packs, tho, since each of them contained new features that finally made it into the Microsoft world with Vista (and if XP's desktop search was so good, why then did MS rewrite the thing and made it a major Vista selling point?)
I may be true that going through all these releases is more expensive (I dont' know - what's the price of Ultimate again? - Apple is not in the habit of crippling its OSes). I guess at least that way one can choose (still running 10.3 here. Only thing that doesn't work is java 1.5, well, not for GUIs that is. Not as bad as missing DirectX 10, I assume.)

Anyway, since cost is apparently the major sticking point with Apple for you, there's this thing called Linux. Works great. Free.

Re:Well, kudos actually... (1)

kindbud (90044) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761648)

This is easy math, compute XP Cost from 2001 with all the service packs, hell even add in the virus scanning software you had to buy, then compare this to your OSX prices in the same amount of time. So which company seems to be milking their customers?

People who use OSX like it and the Apple way of computing, and seek it out. People who use Windows do so because some other app they need requires it. Big difference.

Re:Well, kudos actually... (1)

GaryPatterson (852699) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761874)

Apple don't charge for service packs, unless you consider the major OS upgrade from (say) 10.3 to 10.4 a service pack.

If you're one of those 'easily confused by numbers' people, consider WinXP is WinNT 5.1, while Win2K is WinNT5.0 (according to internal versioning by Microsoft).

That troll died out a few years back for lack of interest. Perhaps you'd consider not digging up the dead troll to flog it once more, eh?

Re:Well, kudos actually... (2, Informative)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762908)

except that whole SP1 in Apples terms = 10.4.# and not 10.# like Wintrolls like the think it does.

!0.5 is a major OS upgrade, not a service pack. Apple just upgrades and inmproves their OS at a much faster rate, not a hard thing to do when you dont support legacy hardware going back a decade, nor work with a huge range of gear by people who are like the one night wonders of the IT world.

who in their right mind (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761348)

deploy pre-release builds into production environments

are they completely mad? Their GM's unstable enough as it is.

Windows Sucks... So does Microsoft (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17761370)

Windows sucks. Microsoft sucks. Why do we have to continuously hear the same old shit rehashed over and over. Does anyone here really care what they're doing in Redmond? Ooooo what going to be their next great move!? What will people do? Oh no!



This is just nonsense. All we have to do is quit using their crap and suddenly... it just doesn't matter anymore! Power of the free market baby! Walla, no more M$!

Yeah, I'll do that (0)

geekoid (135745) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761396)

but only because I hate my company!

Actually, I love were I work, but that sounded funnier.

how many service pascks will vista have??? (1)

mike3 (1054482) | more than 7 years ago | (#17761710)

so will vista have couple like 10 15 service packs so now service packs are really like regular windows update bug fixes?? now it a PR thing not somthing that will actually improve the software??

ARE THEY KIDDING US (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17762398)

I support small businesses in Boston, and I'm telling all my customers to avoid vista-pre-installed pc's like the plague for the next year (2 if they can get away with it). They expect IT support people to put their reputation and jobs on the line by putting pre-release builds and risk their customers' entire business with it? Does microsoft seriously expect the rest of the IT world to go down with it?

Ilya Elbert
http://www.computerrepairboston.com/ [computerrepairboston.com]

I guess I have to be the one who says it ... (1)

Kittenman (971447) | more than 7 years ago | (#17762632)

Money making plan #56745-B

1: Advise of availability of new OS.

2: Listen to lots of people say that they won't upgrade to new OS until SP1 is available.

3: Release new operating system. Some people buy it. Bank the cheques.

4: Release SP1 shortly after. Everyone else who would buy it, buys it now.

5: Profit !!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?