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!

Vista SP1 Guides for IT Professionals Released

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the get-prepped-before-the-hammer-falls dept.

Windows 270

wilkinism writes "Microsoft released several detailed documents explaining just about everything you ever wanted to know about Vista SP1. Highlights include a Deployment Guide, list of included hotfixes, and a 17-page list of 'Notable Changes'. In reviewing the Notable Changes document, it seems the company focused on improving reliability & performance in really specific scenarios, so it's no wonder that most reviewers are reporting no noticeable gains."

cancel ×

270 comments

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

Specific scenarios? (5, Insightful)

ccguy (1116865) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925450)

From the changelog:

25% faster when copying files locally on the same disk on the same machine

Significantly improves the speed of moving a directory with many files underneath.

I don't think those two (from a quick glance at the doc) are very uncommon...

Suckage Removal Subsystem (1, Flamebait)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925494)

Still not present in the list of fixes. ;-)

Eye candy is beautiful, but no SP is going to polish this turd.

Re:Specific scenarios? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925908)

Moving a directory? Why is that complex?

You don't actually physically move the files & directories on disk. You just change a few index entries.

This isn't bleeding edge stuff - I'm sure this was done more than 20 years ago.

Re:Specific scenarios? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926002)

Unless of course the files inherited permissions from the folder they were in recursively, then when you move the folder, the permissions have to be updated...

Re:Specific scenarios? (2, Insightful)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926012)

That's what I'm wondering. A move of a directory tree on the same disk should be changing a couple links and that's it. Regardless of the underlying filesystem.

What would be interesting is if they implemented a faster "copy directory on same disk" that involved hard links and copy-on-demand when files change. (Something like what Sun's ZFS)

Re:Specific scenarios? (5, Interesting)

ccguy (1116865) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926096)

The move operation itself might be as simple as that. The problem is that vista has a tendency to open files for no good reason. For example you can flag 40 files, press shift-del to delete them forever, and have the operation fail because one of the was opened by explorer to display a thumbnail. It's really hard to believe that MS can't put a couple of interns to work on explorer and get rid of these incredible annoying things forever. Or fuck, buy someone else's replacement.

Re:Specific scenarios? (1)

abigor (540274) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926376)

It's not Explorer's fault. From what I recall, you can't delete a file off an NTFS volume if a program has opened it with exclusive (ie not shared) access.

Re:Specific scenarios? (4, Interesting)

ccguy (1116865) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926462)

It's not Explorer's fault. From what I recall, you can't delete a file off an NTFS volume if a program has opened it with exclusive (ie not shared) access.
How it's not Explorer's fault if it's explorer the program that opens the file I just told to delete? If it really really needs to open it so it can show a thumbnail or display the dimensions etc for a few milliseconds before it's deleted, at least it should implement a 'panic close', or 'delete queue', or any other dumb solution they can come up with... anything is better than displaying an error message saying that the file is open (which it's not true by the time the message comes up, btw).

While they are at it, they could ALSO try to not to cancel long operations just because of an error in a specific file...i.e. copy 500 files from one place to another, file number 219 fails and the operation is cancelled? 218 files copied, 287 files that COULD have been copied not copied, WTF?

Ah, and a final suggestion... if the user asks to copy 50 Gb to a drive with 40 Gb free space, fucking start doing it if the users really wants to, instead of completely refusing to even try...you don't know if the remote is making space at the same time, or compressing, or just reporting an invalid free space number for whatever reason.

OK, just needed to vent a little :-) Feel free to defend explorer at any time.

Re:Specific scenarios? (1)

ccguy (1116865) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926546)

I forgot to mention that putting the screen blank for a second, asking for administration rights -i.e. the microsoft way of showing how supersafe their O.S. is- to delete a file that is on a remote system and that can't be deleted because the remote won't let you is stupid.

Just because you are an administrator in your vista machine doesn't mean that you can expect to get administrative permissions in my computer by clicking 'allow'...

It's like the FBI trying to arrest someone in a foreign country by flashing their badg...um...nm :-)

Re:Specific scenarios? (1, Informative)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926636)

"While they are at it, they could ALSO try to not to cancel long operations just because of an error in a specific file...i.e. copy 500 files from one place to another, file number 219 fails and the operation is cancelled? 218 files copied, 287 files that COULD have been copied not copied, WTF?"

That happens with Windows XP (and yes it's really stupid and should have been fixed in a Service Pack) But they actually fixed it in Vista. With Vista if you are copying, moving, deleting. whatever, more than one file and an error occurs, you can skip that file and keep going. One of the few things they actually got right in Vista.

Well, sort of.

Unfortunately you still end up with the problem of selecting a few hundred files to copy, leaving, and when you come back your computer is sitting there waiting for your input in a dialog box because an error occurred with file number 11.

Re:Specific scenarios? (3, Interesting)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926710)

Thats why I wrote my own copy program for windows. It copies and or moves each file individually, taking into account exactly what I intended it to do if the operation failed. Sure it *might* take a little longer, but I only use it in cases where I'm copying/moving hundreds of files and don't want to stand in from on the computer for the entire operation.

Re:Specific scenarios? (3, Informative)

seaturnip (1068078) | more than 6 years ago | (#21927034)

Vista (or Windows XP w/ Resource Kit) already includes a robust copy tool, called Robocopy [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Specific scenarios? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926480)

so? skip the undelete-able file and keep going with the rest of them. I fail to see the problem - unless you have some crappy code with the 'cannot delete' exception getting caught at the wrong level where there is no way left for continuing the delete operation.

Re:Specific scenarios? (2, Informative)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926534)

So handle it the same way *nix does: the deletion takes place when the last program using it closes the file.

Re:Specific scenarios? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926500)

There's a difference between a folder and a file.

I don't think it's Microsoft's job to educate you on that point. I suggest you take a "computing basics" course.

First page (4, Funny)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925470)

The first page of the instructions say: Uninstall Vista, install something else.

Second page says... (4, Funny)

christian.einfeldt (874074) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925640)

... "Please protect your Windows investment! Don't use Microsoft products to access the Internet. Instead, go here to request a free (as in beer) CD [ubuntu.com] with the latest anti-spam and anti-virus software. When your CD arrives, just place it in your CD-ROM, and reboot your computer before going on-line. You will then be able to surf the web in full comfort knowing that no viruses, spyware or spam will take over your machine. When you are ready to return to the full Genuine Windows Vista experience for running your favorite games, such as BSOD, simply reboot your machine and take the CD out of the CD-ROM before the reboot starts."

Re:Second page says... (2, Funny)

Ash Vince (602485) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926536)

When you are ready to return to the full Genuine Windows Vista experience for running your favorite games, such as BSOD, simply reboot your machine and take the CD out of the CD-ROM before the reboot starts.
I find that game too frustrating. I never seem to make any progress with it so I have given up and stuck with Mahjongg instead.

Re:First page (1, Troll)

STrinity (723872) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925696)

The first page of the instructions say: Uninstall Vista, install something else
It's a bit more complicated than that:
  1. Open Start Menu
  2. When the UAC dialogue comes up, click continue
  3. Click Control Panel
  4. When the UAC dialogue comes up, click continue
  5. Double click Administrative Tools
  6. When the UAC dialogue comes up, click continue
  7. etc.

Re:First page (2, Funny)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925726)

mmm, no.

1. Reformat the drive.
2. Install something else.

Re:First page (1)

bondsbw (888959) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925830)

It's a bit more complicated than that:

1. Open Start Menu
2. When the UAC dialogue comes up, click continue
3. Click Control Panel
4. When the UAC dialogue comes up, click continue
5. Double click Administrative Tools
6. When the UAC dialogue comes up, click continue
7. etc.
.
.
.
42. Profit! (Cancel or Allow)

Re:First page (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925768)

The first page of the instructions say: Uninstall Vista, install something else.

Argh! Please, stop with the overly subtle sarcasms, I'm so confused now!

Re:First page (2, Funny)

whopub (1100981) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925836)

everything you ever wanted to know about Vista SP1
In my case an unprinted stamp sized leaflet would do just fine.

Most important recommendation. (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925476)

Recommendation no 1: Do not install it on your personal PC ....

Re:Most important recommendation. (1)

The Living Fractal (162153) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925930)

Sort of a nitpick but.. you told everyone not to install it on their personal Personal Computer.

So.. yeah. You can -troll me now ;p

Re:Most important recommendation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926732)

That's actually not as silly as it sounds. One can have a "personal PC" at home, and a "work PC" at work.

Re:Most important recommendation. (2, Funny)

AnarkiNet (976040) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926968)

Wouldn't they then have a PC and a WC?

Anagram (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925478)

Vista SP = Piss vat.

Failed to include the upgrade to Ubuntu button (-1, Troll)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925484)

That's the feature their customers are going to want most.

Re:Failed to include the upgrade to Ubuntu button (4, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925686)

Look, here's what the intelligent people want from you, and the others who are posting to rip on Vista. Shut the fuck up. We know you don't like Vista, and you've had an entire fucking year to make that plain to everyone. Now, when a Vista story comes along, just shut up so that we can have some sort of sensible, intelligent discussion about the topic.

Re:Failed to include the upgrade to Ubuntu button (-1, Flamebait)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925876)

If the above is your idea of a sensible, intelligent post, then I suggest that maybe you should shut up.

Re:Failed to include the upgrade to Ubuntu button (2, Interesting)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926724)

Not at all. It's my idea of a rant. I've gotten sick and tired of hearing the idiots who feel the need to bash Vista at every opportunity, and karma be damned, it felt good to vent steam.

This is the sensible discussion (-1, Flamebait)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925940)

I've installed this thing several times for myself, friends and family. So far the question isn't "do you like it?" After they've tried Vista the question is "do you want to go back to XP, or do you want to go forward to something different?"

Lots of people are waiting for this SP1 like it's going to fix what's wrong with Vista. The thing is - the fix really is to go in a different direction. None of the improvements in TFA matter much to anybody. It's like Vista, with 0.0001% less FAIL. They failed to address the application compatibility issues, the hardware compatibility issues, the lack of a compelling new feature isssue. It's like Microsoft wants this thing to bounce like a dead cat.

If you can't take the Karma hit, maybe you should stay out of the Vista threads.

application and hardware compatibility? (1)

Animaether (411575) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926412)

out of curiosity - which application and hardware compatibility issues are you referring to that are -not- the developer's / manufacturer's burden to correct?

Ah, the finger of blame (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926640)

It's not like I haven't gotten that approach from the Redmond monopoly before.

You know what? As long as it isn't compatible with most software and hardware, whose fault it is doesn't really matter does it? It goes or it don't. Right now it don't.

Re:This is the sensible discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926428)

Every significant version of Windows has had software and hardware compatibility problems. And they always get solved the same way, software gets updated and old hardware dies. It's just been a while since we've had a new version of Windows and ISVs and IHVs have gotten a bit complacent.

Re:This is the sensible discussion (1, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926600)

If this is intelligent discussion, then so is goatse. Bashing Vista isn't intelligent discussion, it's trolling, when it occurs in the context of a story about SP1. Intelligent discussion would be the merits/demerits of SP1, not saying "lolz people need an upgrade to Ubuntu button".

Moderation games (1, Informative)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926952)

Actually I'm enjoying myself today. One comment is "Insightful troll" and one is "Interesting flamebait".

Although the post reads like a troll, I was quite serious -- Thus far every Vista install I've seen lasted no more than a month. Some went back to XP, a couple decided as long as they'd made a change they might as well try something else before going back to XP... And that makes sense, doesn't it? I mean, you wiped XP and installed Vista hoping for something better didn't you? Why give up after just one FAIL ?

A Vista /. thread is always going to be about axe grinding and nothing else. This is true both for the posts and for the moderation. For helpful discussion you would probably want a different forum [cnet.com] . There you'll find helpful posts like this one [cnet.com] .

Or you can read this helpful post [cnet.com] about downgrading from Vista to XP. Personally I like the thread entitled "Windows Vista: Vista iTunes Video Playback Blame Game [cnet.com] .

Here on /. this is what you get and that's the way it is.

Re:This is the sensible discussion (1)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926708)

They failed to address the application compatibility issues, the hardware compatibility issues, the lack of a compelling new feature isssue
Wait--that's IT?

That's the best you can come up with to say Vista is bad?

application compatibility: I'm sorry, apps that never followed the windows spec will fail. This is a GOOD THING. Apps that spend the hour it takes to follow the spec, well, they work. I mean, unless they use OpenGL on an ATI card. Which leads us to...

hardware compatibility: Vista is a teeny bit different from XP in the driver model. Close enough that XP drivers work for MOST things. For any piece of hardware you've got that (1) doesn't have a Vista driver, (2) won't work with the generic MS driver, and (3) won't work with its XP driver, it's the manufacturer's fault. We DO NOT want MS writing device drivers for everything.

New Features: Off the top of my head, I'll name "press one key and type to open ANYTHING", "backup to your CD-burner", "way better Wi-Fi management", and "Shadow-backups of user files". You might have a utility that does three of those for XP, but now they're integrated.

The reasons not to use Vista are, in order, a game-breaking incompatability, cost, a desire to use something else, like Linux or the Mac. If the choice is between XP and Vista, and there's less than $10 difference in price, go Vista. You know, like the decision process you use to decide if to use the latest stable version of Linux everything.

Re:Failed to include the upgrade to Ubuntu button (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926094)

You can't have a sensible, intelligent discussion about nonsense like cooking pasta in plastic frisbees. The only sensible comment is that you should get a cheap pot at the hardware store. Vista is such nonsense.

Not to be redundant (1)

dg41 (743918) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925502)

But I've been running the RC for SP1 for a bit now, and my system still crashes like the RTM version. I've been meaning to uninstall Vista for awhile. I think it's my hardware being too old, though (Athlon XP 2000+, ABIT NF7-S2 motherboard, 1.5GB RAM)

Re:Not to be redundant (4, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925706)

Having an older system really shouldn't affect the stability of the system. Perhaps some of your RAM is dying. You should run a memory test. Apart from that, it may be some buggy drivers, but it probably has nothing to do with the Athlon 2000+. I have a Celeron 1.5 with 512 MB of RAM. Vista is extremely stable. Although it's unbelievably slow. Which is why I run Mandriva. Of course, the wife refuses to use Linux, Although all she does (web, watch videos, msn) can be done just fine on Linux.

Re:Not to be redundant (1)

benzapp (464105) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926440)

Vista actually includes a pretty decent memory tester too. It's under the administrative tools folder.

Re:Not to be redundant (1)

quazee (816569) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926760)

On older motherboards it often helps to change the Power Options from the 'Balanced' setting to 'Always On'.
This way Vista will never throttle down the CPU, or use chipset-specific low-power states (STOPGRANT, etc.) while the system is running.
You can still set up your own monitor/hard disk/sleep timeouts if you like.

Right (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925506)

"Vista SP1 Guides for IT Professionals Released"

Right... So no one will ever read this.

Vista SP1 (0, Troll)

paxgaea (219419) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925530)

Codename: XP SP2

But first you will have to click the Allow button to 'upgrade'...

small proportion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925534)

okay, so that's 2 items in 17 pages

The most startling "Notable Change": (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925554)

Niggers are no longer permitted to code for Vista!

Not like any niggers know how to code, anyway, but that's still quite shocking news in today's climate!

Re:The most startling "Notable Change": (0, Offtopic)

russlar (1122455) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926100)

Can we block this guy's IP? Please?

Speaking of IP blocks... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926474)

Your should have blocked the Incoming Penises that allowed you to be born. Oh snap!

Re:Speaking of IP blocks... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926972)

That was a really good response!

2GB+ Installation fix? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925560)

The number one thing Vista should fix, and I didn't see it on the list (I could have missed it), is including the fix that will allow machines to install Vista with over 2GB of memory. It is pretty silly that one of the huge benefits of using a 64-bit OS is the ability to have over 4GB of RAM, but Vista has a problem with that.

Vista bashing aside, who would want to install any OS first by REMOVING some of their RAM, installing the OS, applying a patch/fix, then adding back the RAM. What a hassle!

Re:2GB+ Installation fix? (1, Flamebait)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925700)

You've got to be kidding me!

Not that it matters, I've got Gutsy Gibbon ready to go on my new 4GB system.

does that procedure cause a re-activation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925816)

does that procedure cause a re-activation? (you're changing hardware configuration)

m10

Vista Ultimate 64-bit installs fine on 8 GB ram (1)

redstar427 (81679) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925828)

I installed Vista Ultimate, 64-bit, on a dual-quad computer, that has 8 GB ram, without any issue.

Re:Vista Ultimate 64-bit installs fine on 8 GB ram (2, Funny)

BrentH (1154987) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926456)

redstar, apparently, has something to compensate for, I conclude from his message, which has a bit too many comma's in it.

Re:2GB+ Installation fix? (1)

uhlume (597871) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926388)

Are you sure you were installing the 64-bit version?

I have Vista SP1 RC installed (4, Informative)

HeavensBlade23 (946140) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925576)

It did fix a few issues for me, most notably being the widely-reported file copy speed problem. After installing the RC my drive-to-drive speed went from 20MB/s back up to XP levels. That was one of my top-five gripes about Vista.

Re:I have Vista SP1 RC installed (2, Interesting)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925612)

Me too. Copying from my vista machine to the other machines I own was horrificly slow. I'm somewhat concerned that they got a 45% improvement in copying to a non vista machine with the first service pack though. It doesn't speak well for their quality control if a flagship product gets released with that level of error.

I wonder if they've just quietly disabled some of that stupid drm stuff.

Re:I have Vista SP1 RC installed (2, Interesting)

ashridah (72567) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925946)

Let's be clear about this. Copying from disk to disk is a different bottleneck than copying over the network. Network copies are affected by the media playback QoS, AND the relative chattiness of SMB2 (the new version of the CIFS protocol that vista likes to use if it can). Media playback will put an emphasis on prioritising access to media so that it can keep the buffers as full as possible when the QoS service is active (i don't recall what it's called, sorry,) and SMB2 just uses a shitload more packets (and thus, more latency, particularly on busy networks) than SMB1 did.

The DRM components may well be having an effect as well, but it's not the only thing.

ash

Re:I have Vista SP1 RC installed (3, Funny)

operagost (62405) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926084)

I don't SMB2. It's like a totally different Super Mario Bros. game. I hear SMB3 is going to totally rock, though! Rumors are that it will be featured in that "Wizard" movie that's coming out!

Disable indexing, restore point, and shadow volume (4, Informative)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925586)

This will bring your disk access speeds close to XP with or without sp1. SP1 from what I read mainly effects lan speeds.

With all these things going on the disk access will slow down considerable and no service pack will fix it. Most users dont care and just want their system to work so this is why its enabled by VISTA by default.

Re:Disable indexing, restore point, and shadow vol (1)

ichigo 2.0 (900288) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926026)

I thought those were enabled as default in XP as well?

Re:Disable indexing, restore point, and shadow vol (1)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926144)

I thought those were enabled as default in XP as well?

Indexing no, restore yes (though I believe it works differently in XP, I still turn it off and see a not insignificant performance boost), shadow volumes no.

Though various things you install may turn those on for you, a vanilla XP SP2c Pro install has them set as I describe above.

Re:Disable indexing, restore point, and shadow vol (1)

Osty (16825) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926194)

If your system is constantly creating restore points, you're doing something wrong and disabling system restore isn't going to fix that. Volume Shadow Copy service is really only used when a system restore snapshot is being taken or you kicked off a backup (either manually or through a scheduled task), so turning off VSS isn't really going to buy you much.

Indexing is a different issue entirely. You can certainly turn it off, but then you significantly cripple the search functionality available everywhere in Vista (for example, I've come to totally rely on the Start Menu's search function). If you do find that indexing is causing you problems, you can tweak a number of indexing settings, including which folders to watch for indexing. Changing watch locations is a bit of a judgement call. On the one hand, if you have a folder with documents that change often and thus kick off indexing, you might want to stop watching that folder for performance reasons. On the other hand, if the documents change often they're obviously important and so you might want to keep them indexed for quicker search access.

While I will agree that disabling indexing will definitely help performance in limited scenarios, at least for me the functionality of having it enabled completely outweighs what minor performance hit I take when it decides it needs to update the index. At least in my case it's been smart about when it starts (never had indexing run in the middle of a game or while on battery power, for example).

Support Blender and Ogre3D! (3, Interesting)

headkase (533448) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925626)

Bucking the slant around here, I bought Vista the very same day that SP1 RC1 became available exactly because of that. In a short while SP1 will be final and Vista will get incrementally better. It's been a pleasant experience for me so far, all of my software works but about 1 in 15 needs to have XP compatibility checked. UAC doesn't annoy me very often as well - maybe that's because I don't go into OS configuration screens or run XP ticked programs all that often. Now, with all that said: the day Linux runs all my games and all games are released for Linux is the day I say: "Vista? Yeah I used to use that.". Linux has everything but entertainment and for me entertainment is the primary use of my computer.

Re:Support Blender and Ogre3D! (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925716)

Vista is actually pretty good, contrary to popular opinion. I was foolish enough to install SP1 RC1 on my home computer (risky, I know), but it's worked out well for me. The only issue I did have with Vista, a really weird one where DNS would randomly stop working until I restarted, has gone away now. Much better than the last Windows service pack I installed, XP SP2 right when it came out, which broke literally half my games for some reason. In fact, Vista SP1 actually made KOTOR run somehow, which I couldn't manage before.

Re:Support Blender and Ogre3D! (1)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925722)

Look at MythTV...

There's my entertainment.

Re:Support Blender and Ogre3D! (1)

headkase (533448) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926046)

#1 ... the day Linux runs all my games ...

Accomplishable through api-translation programs such as Wine or Cedega (isn't Cedega a branch of Wine??)

#2 ... all games are released for Linux ...

Will happen when enough feedback (see first point for how to achieve feedback) makes Linux a profitable target.

Re:Support Blender and Ogre3D! (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926334)

I hate to play the Devil's advocate, but Wine/Cedega is a damned poor excuse for a viable solution.

I don't play PC games, so I don't have to worry about it. If I want to run Windows apps, I fire up VirtualBox, and run XP, where there aren't any of the API compatibility issues (aside from the normal Windows issues), but of course there's no 3D acceleration for gamers, so they're left without a solution.

API translations are good, but they're constantly playing catch-up, and they'll never be 100% compatible as long as they have to reverse engineer software to continue their development. Sad but true.

Re:Support Blender and Ogre3D! (1)

headkase (533448) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926374)

I'm hoping they'll eventually just cover a segment of what's available: games written only for Windows before Linux took over completely (and when all (new) games are therefore written for Linux) :)

Re:Support Blender and Ogre3D! (2, Insightful)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926184)

linux doesnt even have the everything but entertainment. It lacks a lot in the area of content creation as well.

Gimp is a peice of shit folks. Lets be real.

SP1 includes stability fixes for bios hacks! (2, Interesting)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925650)

Also coming with SP1 but not in the current release candidate, we will also be including updates that deal with two exploits we have seen, which can affect system stability for our customers.
  • The OEM Bios exploit, which involves modifying system files and the BIOS of the motherboard to mimic a type of product activation performed on copies of Windows that are pre-installed by OEMs in the factory.
  • The Grace Timer exploit, which attempts to reset the "grace time" limit between installation and activation to something like the year 2099 in some cases.
Funny ... I don't seem to remember the bios hacks or grace period resets causing stability issues that weren't there already. I'm sure glad they are going to fix them and release them without giving the rest of us a chance to know they are safe to deploy.

Atleast it'll give the 31337 hax0rs something new to work around, keeps them off the streets, prolly requires more drugs though.

Re:SP1 includes stability fixes for bios hacks! (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926224)

I wonder if these will show up in XP SP3 as well.

Re:SP1 includes stability fixes for bios hacks! (1)

VENONA (902751) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926496)

More CPU, more RAM, now more drugs?! Where will it end!

Professionals? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925652)

Vista SP1 Guides for IT Professionals
Who are these "professionals" that install Vista? I have yet to meet one.

Cliffs' Notes (5, Informative)

The Clockwork Troll (655321) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925654)

In my opinion, here are the fixes and improvements ones that the general Windows population might actually care about:

Adds support for exFAT, a new file system supporting larger overall capacity and larger files, which will be used in Flash memory storage and consumer devices.

Enhances the MPEG-2 decoder to support content protection across a user accessible bus on Media Center systems configured with Digital Cable Tuner hardware. This also effectively enables higher levels of hardware decoder acceleration for commercial DVD playback on some hardware.

SP1 addresses issues many of the most common causes of crashes and hangs in Windows Vista, as reported by Windows Error Reporting. These include issues relating to Windows Calendar, Windows Media Player, and a number of drivers included with Windows Vista.

Improves power consumption when the display is not changing by allowing the processor to remain in its sleep state which consumes less energy.

Significantly improves the speed of moving a directory with many files underneath.

Improves performance over Windows Vista's current performance across the following scenarios1:
  25% faster when copying files locally on the same disk on the same machine
  45% faster when copying files from a remote non-Windows Vista system to a SP1 system

Improves responsiveness when doing many kinds of file or media manipulations. For example, with Windows Vista today, copying files after deleting a different set of files can make the copy operation take longer than needed. In SP1, the file copy time is the same as if no files were initially deleted.

Improves the time to read large images by approximately 50%.

Improves IE performance on certain Jscript intensive websites, bringing performance in line with previous IE releases.

Allows users and administrators using Network Diagnostics to solve the most common file sharing problems, not just network connection problems.

SP1 includes a number of changes which allow computer manufacturers and consumers to select a default desktop search program similar to the way they currently select defaults for third-party web browsers and media players. That means that in addition to the numerous ways a user could access a third party search solution in Windows Vista, they can now get to their preferred search results from additional entry points in the Start Menu and Explorer Windows in Windows Vista with SP1. 3rd party software vendors simply need to register their search application using the newly provided protocol in Windows Vista SP1 to enable these options for their customers.

Re:Cliffs' Notes (1, Troll)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926262)

"Adds support for exFAT, a new file system supporting larger overall capacity and larger files, which will be used in Flash memory storage and consumer devices."

Holy propaganda, Batman! Are we to honestly believe that Microsoft will be able to shove a new filesystem down our throats that will -only- work on what is widely being hailed as the worst operating system ever? What a joke!

Re:Cliffs' Notes (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926924)

Nice Summary, thanks.

I'm kind of on the fence with the Vista thing. I just installed it on a new computer instead of XP simply because XP requires a floppy drive to intall RAID drivers (or slipstreaming a new install disk), both of which are a total pain in the ass. After spending a few hours with Vista, I managed to get it to look and feel like XP. With these performance fixes, I might finally be happy with it.

Well... happy with everything except the fucking green circle button in the windows explorer that does *nothing*, which replaced the very useful "up directory level" button there was there before (and they changed backspace from being "up directory level" to "back" as well, which also pisses me off). If SP1 changed that brain-dead behavior, I'd have even sent Bill Gates a box of oreos. As it is, I still think they're all brainless morons who don't understand the difference between looks and functionality.

I'm glad to see so many issues being resolved... (2, Interesting)

SirLurksAlot (1169039) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925712)

even though they're issues which shouldn't have been issues to begin with. I mean, come on!:

(From the list of changes):

Allows users and administrators to control which volumes the disk defragmenter runs on.
and

Improves the copy progress estimation when copying files within Windows Explorer to about two seconds.
Why in the world was defrag set to not give the user a choice on what drive it ran on? Also, why should defrag take an admin password to run??? And why the hell did it ever take longer than 2 seconds to estimate how long it would take to copy files? These are the kind of things that should never have been problems to begin with, and they're indicative of so much of what's wrong with Vista. I got Vista Home Premium with my new PC just to check it out and see what I thought, and I've seriously considered wiping it and installing XP several times. I'll probably wait for SP1 though, which I guess makes me a masochist at this point.

Re:I'm glad to see so many issues being resolved.. (1)

heffrey (229704) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925954)

I don't think it means that it took two seconds to estimate copy progress. I think it means that the estimate is now accurate to about two seconds.

But that's pure guess work because the text isn't precise.

Re:I'm glad to see so many issues being resolved.. (1)

paxgaea (219419) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925964)

I'm not being nitpicky (or at least I don't think so) and I honestly didn't get through reading TFA entirely (it is just painful to look at) but I would surmise that they are talking about getting accuracy of the result to within 2 seconds for the file copy, not the actual time needed to calculate the result.

Either way, from my experiences (granted, limited) Vista sucks. It is harder for me as an admin to deal with, so I can't see how it would be easier for a user to work with. Maybe I am wrong, or in the minority, but I am not a zealot for any OS but this one just seems bad.

Re:I'm glad to see so many issues being resolved.. (1)

SirLurksAlot (1169039) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926136)

Hmmmm, you could be right. Still, Vista takes forever to calculate how long a copy operation will take, and much, much longer to actually perform the copy than it would to perform the same operation on an XP machine with the same hardware specs. Vista isn't entirely bad, but there are very few features on it that are an actual improvement on XP. I do like the new explorer interface (drop down paths, which I've been told is similar to KDE) though, and program specific controls for sound are nice.

I don't really have any experience as an admin with Vista, but I've had to troubleshoot it plenty of times in tech support. I always groaned on the inside whenever a customer called in with issues with their Vista machine.

Re:I'm glad to see so many issues being resolved.. (1)

Keeper (56691) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926672)

Also, why should defrag take an admin password to run???

Are you REALLY asking why an Admin password is required to perform read operations which effectively bypass ACL checks?

Re:I'm glad to see so many issues being resolved.. (0)

dukieduke (918198) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926956)

"Also, why should defrag take an admin password to run???"

Because it isn't set up as easy as Linux, where clearly everyone has total disk access.

So long, Vista (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925744)

I've been using vista almost for a year now. At first, I was quite happy about it, it is supposed to have exiting new features like IO priority, readyboost, superfetch and all that. And I liked Aero at first. And better security (I must say, I like UAC, it's really no greater pain than sudo).

But it's SLOW. And while I could live with that, I just couldn't stand it hijacking my desktop. How many times did the system start doing some heavy disk IO, without ANY option to stop it. Even task manager didn't respond so I could check what was going on.

As time passed, I upgraded from a 3 year old laptop to a new one (Acer 5920G, a fine machine I must say). The only problem is, Vista is not any faster than on a 3 year old system!? Wtf??

So, the other day I was doing some linux stuff and installed Ubuntu to an external USB disk.

OH MY GOD (spoken in that-lady's-voice-from-friends-series).

It's fast. It's nice. And it's fast. And it uses only so little of my 2 gb ram. And did I tell you it was fast? Oh, and file copy is a snap!

So I've been using it for a week or so and I love it. But then... yesterday I came across this "compiz fussion" thing.

OH MY FSCUKING GOD THAT'S AWESOME!

So guess what. About an hour ago I've "cp -a /dev/sdb1 /dev/sda1". Yup. Vista no more (well, it is saved as an image on external drive, just in case).

I do a lot of .Net programming and I've set up a vmware XP box for development and virtualized XP is waaayyy faster than vista ever was.

Since SP1 doesn't solve any performance issues, I probably won't use that beast ever again. When I have to use Windows, I'll use XP.

So... Is Linux winning the desktop in 2008?

Totally!

Re:So long, Vista (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926138)

Err... doesn't the article say that SP1 DOES solve some performance issues?

Re:So long, Vista (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926260)

YHBT YHL HAND.

Did someone actually take that post seriously?

Re:So long, Vista (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926154)

Linux will never win the desktop in 2008, until it supports the dam iphone, itunes, adobe applications, and any of the other billions of windows apps that people use.

They wont go to linux.

Linux is still a pain in the ass to configure compared to windows. The average person isnt going to linux... They're going to APPLE.

Just go to your local Apple store if you have one. The one in NYC, and the one out here on the island... (long island) Is Jam packed from the minute it opens.

Apple is winning my friend.

I dont own a mac, and the times i've had to use them for work (video post production), i've found it to be rather odd, and apps do crash btw... but anyways i found it odd... but i'm not saying i couldnt switch. Apple makes it a lot easier than any linux flavor will ever.

But lets not kid ourselves, Apple is just as evil as Microsoft. They purposely fuck up windows iTunes, to drive Mac sales.

I do like my iphone and ipod though.

Re:So long, Vista (1)

Prof.Phreak (584152) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926848)

It depends. I've personally switched three `computer illiterate' (well, not programmers) folks to Linux. They installed Ubuntu, and guess what... they're using it. I doubt they realize it's not Windows, but... for everything they do, it just works. No issues.

They use the Internet, play games (well, card games, sudoku, etc), listen to music (mp3s) and watch movies (dvds, mostly).

Artists are a weird bunch, and there's a culture behind Apple, so... they're not gonna switch. But 90% of computer users at home don't need anything beyond basic internet terminal with music/video capability---and that's where Linux shines compared to the rest (well, price/utility).

Oh, and it makes a great server :-)

Re:So long, Vista (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21927098)

It's cool the dude found a solution he likes. I virtualize XP also, except my host O/S is now OSX. I got a Mac, and like you said Apple is winning. I don't really know. But I like Leopard a lot more than tiger, and I can run 2 VMs and probably more at once and they're all fast on top of stuff running in Leopard which is mainly browser/email/cog... Got a few VMs of various linuxes... Lots of things to dislike on Apple (iTunes and all that). But Steve Jobs as the benevolent dictator. I like that view. I'm nervous about vendor lock in and I did spend a lot more for to try out OSX. I've been really pissed at Apple sometimes too. But Leopard has been running for a couple weeks and I think it is a big improvement.

So I've seen Vista in the stores, and read about horror stories on slashdot. I'd love to see it become a stable fast real improvement over XP, and also hopefully completely gutted of DRM and hacked to hell and back so that people who want to run it don't have to worry about fascist activations and stuff. I leeched it off the net and I could run it in a VM, got it just-in-case. But I doubt I ever will install it. I'm a little partial to seeing MS fall flat on their face and ppl jump ship in droves. But really I guess it doesn't matter what I think, I'm not the average end-user. Oh yeah you're right about apps crashing on the Mac, a lot, and actually a lot more than on XP for me, but the O/S is stable. and updates force a reboot, reboot, reboot... I can hardly see how anyone can make fun of MS for that.

What really makes the switch to Apple bearable is VMware Fusion and bootcamp and rEFIt (for triple boot to linux too). Suppose I should mention parallels too cause I tried it first and then switched to Fusion as soon as I heard about it... you can run your bootcamp XP either native for full speed, or boot it in the VM and access your apps that aren't performance critical. If it weren't for that I'd probably be running XP as my main desktop on my iMac after a year of Tiger... I'm still hoping KDE4 gets some more improvements, but at this point, having spread myself across Gnome/KDE/XP/OSX... wtf, none of them are perfect, and they all have something good you can say about them... I like gnome the least of all though. Hate to say I like XP at all, but it's got a lot of stupid stuff I like about it even tho it's made by MS hehe...

'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21925846)

let yOUR conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE [yahoo.com]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A [nytimes.com]

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html [cnn.com]

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html [cnn.com]

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html [cnn.com]

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece [timesonline.co.uk]
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

what we really need (-1, Flamebait)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925906)

everything you ever wanted to know about Vista SP1. Highlights include a Deployment Guide

No thanks, we just need an eradication guide (pest eradication, to be clear).

Does it include: (4, Funny)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#21925970)

"Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to make sure." ?

One reason not to install on 64 bit (1)

JamesTRexx (675890) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926006)

VMware server... I'll have to pick specific updates and avoid those that modify the original unsigned driver loading option.
I'm not going to use the 32bit version as having 4GiB would waste 1, and because it's for work running Vista is mandatory now. :-/

Too bad it seems the one hotfix in the list about file copy speed is one that needs a call to customer support.

When does SP1 come out?! I cant take it anymore (2, Informative)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21926090)

I run Vista 64, because XP64 has no printer drivers for my printer (s9000). I blame Canon. Canon wrote one for Vista64, but not XP64.

I hope Canon gets the big aids dick.

I like Vista in general. Yes it is slow, but there are some nice things about it. SOME.

I've been debating on going back to XP64, but i cant until i know for sure that Vista SP1 is a disaster.

I need SP1 to come out soon because i really need to know if it will actually improve Vista64, back to XP64 quality levels.

The sooner it comes out, the quicker i can decide whether or not to go back to XP64... printer be damned.

Vista shipped with a serious bug (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926122)

As a backup vendor, we write products which backup and restore system components. As we started developing for vista, we noticed that when we tried to do a online restore of the VSS system writer, the files would fail to copy. Something about the pre-boot process that runs the MoveFilEx files wasn't a privileged process. This turned out to be a bug that was fixed in SP1. So technically vista shipped with NO backup and restore support.

which "Professional" ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21926774)

...no sane professional has installed Vista yet, so why pretend this is intended to professional audience when mainly end-users has suffered from Vista force feed.

Show stopper file copy bug (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21927000)

What's the hells up with this file copy thing? Its a known issue for ages with nearly everyone online columnist and blogger cribbing about it. Is Microsoft so devoid of talent that they can't fix it even in SP1. Surely there has to be more to this than is being let on, is there some drm issue involved here.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>