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!

Windows Vista SP1 Meeting Sour Reception In Places

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the just-a-bit-more-testing dept.

Windows 501

Stony Stevenson writes "A day after it was released for public download, Windows Vista SP1 is drawing barbs from some computer users who say the software wrecked their systems. 'I downloaded it via Windows Update, and got a bluescreen on the third part of the update,' wrote 'Iggy33' in a comment posted Wednesday on Microsoft's Vista team blog. Iggy33 was just one of dozens of posters complaining about Vista Service Pack 1's effect on their PCs. Other troubles reported by Vista SP1 users ranged from a simple inability to download the software from Microsoft's Windows Update site to sudden spikes in memory usage. To top it all off, the service pack will not install on computers that use peripheral device drivers that Microsoft has deemed incompatible."

cancel ×

501 comments

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

And the problem is...? (5, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800448)

So, SP1 won't install if there's an incompatible driver present (as opposed to installing and then crashing all the time, or just removing the driver)? That sounds pretty fucking sensible to me, what exactly are we supposed to find bad about that?

Obviously it'd be better if no such incompatibility existed, but if you have to deal with such a situation, this seems like the best way to do it, by far.

How about ... (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800554)

Install and just disable the device?

Or rather, how about installing the parts that CAN be installed and skipping anything else?

This is about getting PATCHES in place. Not whether you have an unsupported CD-ROM and, therefore, you will not be allowed to apply the OTHER patches.

Re:How about ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800580)

Because device drivers never had a negative effect on a new kernel, right?

Re:How about ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800652)

Those users affected by this problem should be able to uninstall the drivers themselves, instead of finding that their Keyboard or mouse driver has been uninstalled without informing them properly and no way back but a new/re-installation of windows..

Re:How about ... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800760)

should be able to uninstall the drivers themselves

With emphasis on should, given Microsoft's history on error messages (my document failed to print!) the message probably says something along the lines of "You have incompatible hardware and we cannot install this service pack, have a nice next three days disabling drivers one at a time trying to figure out which one it is"

Re:How about ... (1)

Your.Master (1088569) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800676)

Install and just disable the device?
Are you serious? You'd rather Windows Update disable a bunch of devices by default than leave your computer functioning as it used to, albeit with somewhat slow file copies? If you want that, download it from microsoft.com yourself.

This is about a kernel change, which isn't necessarily trivial to distribute piecemeal (not to mention the fact that all of these drivers would then have to be tested on every possible combination of partial-SP1 updates). There are other patches, too, which can be downloaded separately anyway.

Seems to me that installing the parts that can be installed and skipping anything else is exactly what they're doing.

If Microsoft offered it, people would. (4, Informative)

khasim (1285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800756)

If you want that, download it from microsoft.com yourself.
And if Microsoft offered that option, people would.

You seem to believe that the service packs are nothing more than a "roll-up" of the other patches.

Here's news for you, they aren't.

Re:If Microsoft offered it, people would. (4, Informative)

Your.Master (1088569) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800810)

Right here buddy: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=B0C7136D-5EBB-413B-89C9-CB3D06D12674&displaylang=en [microsoft.com]

I don't at all have the idea that an SP is a roll-up, the GP did. I was disabusing him of that notion.

That IS the service pack. (3, Informative)

khasim (1285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800870)

Here, let me quote that page for you. :D

SP1 addresses specific reliability and performance issues, supports new types of hardware, and adds support for several emerging standards.
Unless you have an unsupported device on your computer in which case this update will not be applied.

The question remains, why did Microsoft choose to do it that way rather than any of the other MORE PREFERABLE TO THE END USER ways that have been mentioned. :D

Re:How about ... (5, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800680)

Are you kidding? Disabling the device would have users furious, and rightly so. And it may not be possible to skip the parts which are incompatible... but only Microsoft can tell us that one.

Ubuntu can do it. (4, Interesting)

khasim (1285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800958)

It always amazes me how people can be so defensive about such simple operations.

Almost every Linux distribution can manage this without any problem. Many of them doing it for free (as in beer).

And yet you're saying that Microsoft could not. Whatever.

Re:Ubuntu can do it. (2, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800996)

No, I'm saying Microsoft MAY NOT be able to. Huge difference there. I don't know if they can or can't, neither do you. The only people who know are the programmers at Microsoft who coded this service pack up, they're the ones who could tell us if the conflicting parts of the service pack can just be cut out or not.

That's the important thing here, and whether or not Ubuntu, or any other OS on earth, can manage it is 100% irrelevant. The fact that it's possible in another setting doesn't prove it's possible in this one.

I said "Ubuntu can do it". (4, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801052)

No, I'm saying Microsoft MAY NOT be able to. Huge difference there.
And I said that Ubuntu could do it.

And that most Linux distributions can. For free (as in beer).

But feel free to claim that a company with BILLIONS of dollars and hundreds of programmers at their disposal MAY NOT be able to duplicate that feat.

And that's the best you have? :D

Re:How about ... (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800910)

Or rather, how about installing the parts that CAN be installed and skipping anything else?
That will give support hell for Microsoft though, and I wouldn't like to be in their shoes if a third party driver (note, this is not about Microsoft hardware) was among those rare exceptions and gave some user some sort of "incomplete Vista SP1".

- What product do you own?
- Uhh, well, it installed the components it could... Uh, do we still call this SP1?

No, this sounds like the best option to me.

I think it's even important that the user need to uninstall said driver first manually, because only then will he/she be aware of the problem. If it just silently disables something while updating to SP1, then you can be sure there'll be users confused about that instead and not knowing where to go next or maybe not even what exactly happened.

Re:How about ... (4, Insightful)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800974)

That will give support hell for Microsoft

Uhh, that's what you get for pioneering and dominating the market for an OS that's supposed to run on thousands of hardware configurations?

Or, to put it another way, maybe those guys over at Apple aren't so crazy after all ;)

Re:And the problem is...? (4, Insightful)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800588)

There's such a thing as user interaction and graceful degradation. People might want to accept lesser functionality because SP1 would give them things they can't do without. They might view sound as something unnecessary and thus choose to accept a non functioning piece of hardware. Graceful degradation would mean that it's OK to install but the printer will only print in black and white.

Re:And the problem is...? (3, Insightful)

spazdor (902907) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800642)

Or, God forbid, we just ask the user's permission to load a potentially unsafe driver!

Re:And the problem is...? (5, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800832)

I hate to say it, but I tend to take Microsoft's side on this one. If you do that, the vast majority of people won't care and will just click OK no matter what. Just like when their firewall says, "this is a potentially unsafe Web site". They click OK anyway because they just don't care.

Re:And the problem is...? (4, Interesting)

spazdor (902907) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800978)

That's okay with me. Just warn me about the risks and get the hell out of my way. The point, to me, of those little warning boxes is not to dissuade people from accessing the sites/loading the drivers that they want. The point is just to let the user know that they're now leaving the Supported Zone and entering the shady world of Your Own Discretion.

Re:And the problem is...? (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801022)

That's a reasonable view, the problem is that Microsoft has to account for the fact that a lot of their customers aren't reasonable. They'll bitch and moan no matter how much Microsoft reminds them that it was unsupported... and if your customers get pissed off enough to switch to a competitor, it doesn't matter how in the wrong they were. You still lost.

Re:And the problem is...? (5, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800950)

Or, God forbid, we just ask the user's permission to load a potentially unsafe driver!

I sense a double standard.

If someone loaded a driver that was known not to work with a given linux kernel and then it didn't work and caused kernel panics, what would we hear? Something like -- you're an idiot, you brought this on yourself, linux even warned you it was incompatible when you installed it, how much of a dipshit are you? What exactly did you expect?

The same thing happens on Windows and we'll hear chants of "Vista sucks because it crashes all the time" followed by a slashdot "Amen!" The fact that its crashing because the user loaded a driver Vista warned him not too? Well its still Vista's fault for some reason.

Re:And the problem is...? (1)

spazdor (902907) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801000)

Not really. If I load a Risky Driver and it makes the system go all jibbly, I got fair warning, and I take it to be my responsibility to remove or upgrade the driver. I guess it's unrealistic to ask the Windows-using public to take this attitude, but I think it's the fairest.

Re:And the problem is...? (1)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800736)

So, SP1 won't install if there's an incompatible driver present
No. It will not install if there is a driver that is incompatible according to Microsoft, and who knows what criteria they apply? It would be good if they could accurately identify incompatible drivers, but I doubt that they can.

Re:And the problem is...? (2, Informative)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800796)

Seems pretty accurate [microsoft.com] to me, or at least likely to be. Look under Cause 5. It's a handful of drivers, it's not like Microsoft is taking some sort of shotgun approach here.

Re:And the problem is...? (2, Funny)

griego (1108909) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800918)

I imagine their criteria is how many bluescreen reports they get from users through their online reporting tool.

Re:And the problem is...? (1)

exley (221867) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800848)

Microsoft even has a list [microsoft.com] of drivers that will cause the SP1 update to be unavailable for some users -- that was very handy for me in figuring out why SP1 wasn't showing up. Perusing the rest of that link shows some other reasons why users might not see the SP1 update as being available.

I had to go manually download and install two drivers. While it would have been nice for those to show up in Windows update as well it wasn't terribly painful. For anyone needing to update the Intel 965 drivers, I downloaded the ZIP file (the .EXE installer complained about the driver not being certified or some nonsense for my machine) and pointed the driver updater to the .INF file to get it installed. No issues so far...

Re:And the problem is...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800890)

Well, the article also mentions that some Intel display drivers are on the incompatible list.

Meaning that some boxes that ran Vista, won't run Vista SP1. Cool thing?

Well SP1 saved me some crucial time this morning.. (3, Interesting)

funkdancer (582069) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800930)

.. by suggesting that the 4gb memory stick would operate a lot faster if I put it into a high speed plug which was available on my Dell 2407wfp rather than in the top tray of the Antec 900 case. I hadn't figured that one out myself for some reason.

Had to transfer files (photos) from my D70s memory card to my wife's USB stick so she could bring some shots to her work. Estimated time before I moved the stick was 15-20 minutes; just moving the stick to the monitor it took 2-3.

In effect it was saying, hey you got a high speed usb stick, why plug it into a slow connector when you have a fast one available for use.

I for one thought that was sweet, especially as I just dodged the worst Melbourne morning traffic by not having to stay home another 15 minutes.

Re:Well SP1 saved me some crucial time this mornin (3, Informative)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800976)

Was this not in Vista SP0? I'd be astonished if it wasn't, because that was in Windows XP.

Re:And the problem is...? (1)

jnadke (907188) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801028)

I had an unsupported SigmaTel sound driver in my laptop. I couldn't install the much-needed SP1.

Instead I uninstalled the offending sound driver, then installed SP1. Afterward, I reinstalled the driver without a hitch. I don't see the big deal.

But I lost 4 hours of my life figuring out why SP1 wouldn't install.

I'm pissed at Microsoft for neither releasing SP1 fast enough or reliably enough. Along with probably everyone else.

However, I'm not going to go all hippie-like and say Vista isn't an upgrade. There are many things Vista has that would make XP a better operating system (I/O scheduler, UAC, Explorer error handling, 3D accelerated GUI, etc). They should really backport these features to XP and release it as a $30 upgrade. That'd be nice.

Time to disable auto install of updates (4, Insightful)

cjmnews (672731) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800460)

For those of you that do this to your parents and relatives for easier support.

Re:Time to disable auto install of updates (4, Funny)

sleigher (961421) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800508)

Hopefully those of you who do support friends and family weren't cruel enough to put Vista on their machines.

Re:Time to disable auto install of updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800590)

My friend has a Toshiba laptop with Vista. I said "Don't get Vista, get XP if you need Windows". No luck for me -- her computer minded friend. She's quite willing to pay to get XP but a quick check made it seem that putting a fresh install of XP on it would screw up the computer. Any ideas?

Re:Time to disable auto install of updates (2, Insightful)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800966)

"a quick check made it seem that putting a fresh install of XP on it would screw up the computer. Any ideas?"

I'm not positive on this, but I would presume that in order to install XP, you would need to format the drive and do a clean install of XP. So if by "screw up the computer" you mean, "Lose any data which wasn't backed up to another medium or another computer), yes. The only other thing I'd be slightly worried about is just verifying that all the hardware in the laptop is supported by XP - but that is pretty likely to be the case. Still, it's not guaranteed, so it might be worth taking a few minutes to check.

You may also want to download the XP drivers to a CD-Rom or something, so that, if e.g. you can't get on your network right away after installing XP, you can install the network driver from the CD. You might also want to put video drivers on the CD, so you can install the latest driver first thing, to get XP out of "VGA" mode, and into a more usable video mode right away.

Re:Time to disable auto install of updates (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801002)

or just add them to the install disk
http://driverpacks.net/ [driverpacks.net]

A bad thing? (5, Insightful)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800490)

To top it all off, the service pack will not install on computers that use peripheral device drivers that Microsoft has deemed incompatible."
And that's a bad thing? The way I see it, this prevents even more problems. Honestly though I have heard great things about the upgrade from many users. Also Engadget was running a story and most of the people that commented had good things to say.

It's know that anytime an update is released there will always be some problems. http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/19/some-vista-sp1-early-adopters-reporting-problems-how-about-you/#comments [engadget.com]

Re:A bad thing? (0, Troll)

Damocles the Elder (1133333) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800566)

It seems like a great thing, but we don't know how they deem things incompatible. MS, in theory, has a big list of compatible hardware [microsoft.com] (which seems to be down atm, but providing an article with a link for completeness); however, for all we know it's one of those "Pay us and we'll 'certify' your software as Windows Compat, wink wink", just like the Nintendo Seal of Approval from all those years ago. Are these actually incompatible peripherals, or has the company making the hardware just not coughed up enough in fees to be deemed compatible?

Re:A bad thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800640)

They're not really "incompatible". Something in SP1 broke a handful of old drivers (mostly for audio chips), so the SP1 installer won't continue until the user upgrades to the fixed drivers.

Re:A bad thing? (3, Informative)

toleraen (831634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800718)

As explained here [winsupersite.com] , and detailed in this knowledge base [microsoft.com] , MS actually had a halfway decent reason behind it.

Re:A bad thing? (3, Informative)

Your.Master (1088569) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800784)

I'm sure they deem things incompatible by ouija board.

You can check the complete list of incompatible drivers here (under "Method for Cause 5"):

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=948343 [microsoft.com]

This isn't a for-pay whitelist, they are blacklisting software that conflicts in some manner with SP1 causing system instability or more general malfunction. There's a word for that. Incompatible. This "pay us and we'll certify you" fantasy is a wild conspiracy theory.

You can download and install SP1 from microsoft.com yourself, along with installing said drivers, if you want to verify this.

quick breath (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800502)

Khaaaaaaaan-

uh, I mean,

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaates!!!

Incompatible (-1, Troll)

Damocles the Elder (1133333) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800506)

So what the article's really saying is that hard drives with Vista installed should be listed as an "incompatible peripheral".

Can anyone please explain (0, Troll)

TBerben (1061176) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800510)

How this is any different from any other installation of Windows [insert version] + [insert servicepack]? That's a joke, btw..

I've had no problems (4, Interesting)

jwsmith00 (262885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800520)

I'm very happy with SP1. I've been very critical of Vista. But now I can say that I wouldn't go back to XP.

Re:I've had no problems (1)

Sicily1918 (912141) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800604)

Same here... I installed it on a P4, a Core Duo, and the 64-bit version on a Q6600 machine -- no problems on any of them.

Re:I've had no problems (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800654)

I was lambasted last time I made a PRO Vista/SP1 comment.

SP1 has met and exceeded my expectations. I haven't tried it in an Enterprise environment BUT, as a person would has worked in large corporate enterprises, it wouldn't be an authorized patch until it passed QA.

So what's the problem? As I see it - General Microsoft woes.

Apple's updates also cause instability and incompatibilities.

Prepare, Backup and Install - a good practice.

12 blog comments = news ? (5, Insightful)

urbanriot (924981) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800522)

12 blog commentors claim to have had problems installing SP1 and that's newsworthy? I'd be curious to see their system configuration, as I'm so far nine for nine successful installs on various system configurations with no issues whatsoever (in fact, some systems had issues corrected).

Re:12 blog comments = news ? (3, Insightful)

avandesande (143899) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800612)

I wouldn't be surprized if their systems had been heavily customized (super users). Not making execuses but probably not a very good example of an average user. Regular j6p's don't usually install service packs and then blog about how well they worked.

Vocal Minority, as Usual (5, Insightful)

ThinkFr33ly (902481) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800526)

Dozens? Seriously? So that represents, what, about .0005% of users installing SP1?

Why is it news that a few dozen people have issues with a service pack installation? Oh, that's right... this is Slashdot.

Slashdot should just get it over with and change their slogan to "News for people who hate Microsoft. Stuff that we made up."

Re:Vocal Minority, as Usual (4, Interesting)

cliffski (65094) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800638)

well said. I kicked off my sp1 install and went to lunch. Came back to a machine needing 1 reboot, and then back into my work. Later found I needed to reinstall my monitor driver which was apparently not certified. Took 5 mins.
the fact that a few people might be moaning wildly does not mean the service pack met with a bad reception. This is the only place where it is vaguely an issue.

Re:Vocal Minority, as Usual (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800792)

Dozens? Seriously? So that represents, what, about .0005% of users installing SP1?

Well, if for the sake of argument we assume that by "dozens" you mean, say, 6 dozen (72 users) that would make the entire base of users installing SP1 to be, what, 144,000?

Sounds about right. But hey, who's counting.

Re:Vocal Minority, as Usual (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800912)

Or maybe about 14.4 million? See that little "%" after the number? Means percent, as in "of one hundred."

Re:Vocal Minority, as Usual (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800914)

Well, if for the sake of argument we assume that by "dozens" you mean, say, 6 dozen (72 users) that would make the entire base of users installing SP1 to be, what, 144,000?

Sounds about right. But hey, who's counting.
Obviously not you, friend. 72 is .0005% of 14.4 million, not 144,000. Seriously, that's grade school math.

Re:Vocal Minority, as Usual (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800968)

Yeah, well, sorry. Couple of beers and see what happens.

there is something I dont get... (1)

Bartas (929484) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800532)

It saids: 'I downloaded it via Windows Update, and got a bluescreen on the third part of the update,' but isnt it supposed to be on Windows Update next month?

Re:there is something I dont get... (4, Informative)

nbannerman (974715) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800564)

You can manually search for new updates now and it'll appear and can be manually installed - however the phased process (3 updates total I think) will automatically occur next month.

Re:there is something I dont get... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800618)

You have to apply the registry change to get it on WU. It's not on WU for people who didn't apply the change and I believe it will not do the incompatible driver check if you do apply the change.

Re:there is something I dont get... (1)

joeytmann (664434) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800752)

No registry change is needed. Just start up WU and tell it to check for new updates. Its an optional update at the moment, but in a month it will be mandatory, probably gives MS some time to tweak as reports of certain incompatiabilities are reported to them.

good (5, Interesting)

frakir (760204) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800562)

One day I hope to enter a store, pick up a brand new hot game and find a sticker on it:
"WINE COMPATIBLE"

Re:good (5, Funny)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800804)

... and all the muggles will think that means that just like cheese, this game goes well with wine.

"Ooohh, How thoughtful, this game goes with Merlot. Honey! We need to stop at the liquer store"

Re:good (2, Funny)

|Cozmo| (20603) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800960)

All my games are wine compatible (except online-only games that you can't pause). I just have to be careful not to spill it in my lap.

Bermuda Triangle (0, Offtopic)

explosivejared (1186049) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800578)

"It exiled all my Nvidia drivers to the Bermuda Triangle."

I always thought the Bermuda Triangle was caused by Satan or some paranormal magnetic field, but being a magical disturbance from a portal that Microsoft malevolently banishes things to makes much a lot of sense.

Reasons SP1 doesn't appear in Windows Update (0, Redundant)

jrronimo (978486) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800582)

There are 8 reasons [microsoft.com] SP1 may not appear if you check WU: 1. You are already running Windows Vista SP1. 2. Windows Vista SP1 has not been released for the language of the language pack that you have installed. 3. Windows Service Pack Blocker Tool is used to block the delivery of Windows Vista SP1 from Automatic Updates or from Windows Update. 4. You tried to install Windows Vista SP1, and the installation failed with a known inconsistency in the file or registry structure. 5. A hardware device driver or device software was problematic when you updated to Windows Vista SP1. The Windows Update service can detect the small set of device drivers and software that falls into this category. The Windows Update service will not offer Windows Vista SP1 until an update for the hardware device driver or the device software has been installed. 6. You have installed a prerelease version of Windows Vista SP1, and you must uninstall the prerelease version, or start with a new installation of Windows Vista. 7.You used the third-party program vLite to configure the system, and you may have removed required system components that have to be available for Windows Vista SP1 to be installed. 8. You see one or more updates for Windows Vista when you run Windows Update. However, you do not see Windows Vista SP1 listed. At that website are further causes for those 8 reasons, but the specifically mentioned drivers that block SP1 are: Audio drivers Realtek AC'97 For x86-based computers: Alcxwdm.sys - version 6.0.1.6242 or earlier For x64-based computers: Alcwdm64.sys - version 6.0.1.6242 or earlier SigmaTel For x86-based computers: Sthda.sys - version 5.10.5762.0 or earlier For x64-based computers: Sthda64.sys - version 5.10.5762.0 or earlier SigmaTel For x86-based computers: Stwrt.sys - version 6.10.5511.0 or earlier For x64-based computers: Stwrt64.sys - version 6.10.5511.0 or earlier Creative Audigy For x86-based and x64-based computers: Ctaud2k.sys - version 6.0.1.1242 or earlier For x86-based computers: P17.sys all versions (This was originally a Windows XP-based driver.) Conexant HD Audio For x86-based computers: Chdart.sys - version 4.32.0.0 or earlier For x64-based computers: Chdart64.sys - version 4.32.0.0 or earlier Biometric (Fingerprint) Sensors AuthenTec Fingerprint Sensor with the Atswpdrv.sys driver file version 7.7.1.7 or earlier UPEK Fingerprint Sensor with the Tcusb.sys driver file version 1.9.2.99 or earlier Display drivers Intel Display For x86-based computers: Igdkmd32.sys versions between and including driver 7.14.10.1322 and 7.14.10.1403 For x64-based computers: Igdkmd64.sys versions between and including driver 7.14.10.1322 and 7.14.10.1403 Other drivers Texas Instruments Smart Card Controller with the GTIPCI21.sys driver file version 1.0.1.19 or earlier Sierra Wireless AirCard 580 with the Watcher.exe application version 3.4.0.9 or earlier (This application is located in the AirCard 580 Program Files folder.) Symantec software driver for Symantec Endpoint Protection and for Symantec Network Access Control clients] For x86-based computers: Wgx.sys versions 11.0.1000.1091 or earlier For x64-based computers: Wgx64.sys versions 11.0.1000.1091 or earlier

Re:Reasons SP1 doesn't appear in Windows Update (5, Informative)

jrronimo (978486) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800758)

There are 8 reasons [microsoft.com] SP1 may not appear if you check WU:
1. You are already running Windows Vista SP1.
2. Windows Vista SP1 has not been released for the language of the language pack that you have installed.
3. Windows Service Pack Blocker Tool is used to block the delivery of Windows Vista SP1 from Automatic Updates or from Windows Update.
4. You tried to install Windows Vista SP1, and the installation failed with a known inconsistency in the file or registry structure.
5. A hardware device driver or device software was problematic when you updated to Windows Vista SP1. The Windows Update service can detect the small set of device drivers and software that falls into this category. The Windows Update service will not offer Windows Vista SP1 until an update for the hardware device driver or the device software has been installed.
6. You have installed a prerelease version of Windows Vista SP1, and you must uninstall the prerelease version, or start with a new installation of Windows Vista.
7.You used the third-party program vLite to configure the system, and you may have removed required system components that have to be available for Windows Vista SP1 to be installed.
8. You see one or more updates for Windows Vista when you run Windows Update. However, you do not see Windows Vista SP1 listed.


At that website are further causes for those 8 reasons, but the specifically mentioned drivers that block SP1 are:

Audio drivers
Realtek AC'97
For x86-based computers: Alcxwdm.sys - version 6.0.1.6242 or earlier
For x64-based computers: Alcwdm64.sys - version 6.0.1.6242 or earlier

SigmaTel
For x86-based computers: Sthda.sys - version 5.10.5762.0 or earlier
For x64-based computers: Sthda64.sys - version 5.10.5762.0 or earlier

SigmaTel
For x86-based computers: Stwrt.sys - version 6.10.5511.0 or earlier
For x64-based computers: Stwrt64.sys - version 6.10.5511.0 or earlier

Creative Audigy
For x86-based and x64-based computers: Ctaud2k.sys - version 6.0.1.1242 or earlier
For x86-based computers: P17.sys all versions (This was originally a Windows XP-based driver.)

Conexant HD Audio
For x86-based computers: Chdart.sys - version 4.32.0.0 or earlier
For x64-based computers: Chdart64.sys - version 4.32.0.0 or earlier

Biometric (Fingerprint) Sensors
AuthenTec Fingerprint Sensor with the Atswpdrv.sys driver file version 7.7.1.7 or earlier
UPEK Fingerprint Sensor with the Tcusb.sys driver file version 1.9.2.99 or earlier

Display drivers
Intel Display
For x86-based computers: Igdkmd32.sys versions between and including driver 7.14.10.1322 and 7.14.10.1403
For x64-based computers: Igdkmd64.sys versions between and including driver 7.14.10.1322 and 7.14.10.1403

Other drivers
Texas Instruments Smart Card Controller with the GTIPCI21.sys driver file version 1.0.1.19 or earlier
Sierra Wireless AirCard 580 with the Watcher.exe application version 3.4.0.9 or earlier (This application is located in the AirCard 580 Program Files folder.) Symantec software driver for Symantec Endpoint Protection and for Symantec Network Access Control clients]
For x86-based computers: Wgx.sys versions 11.0.1000.1091 or earlier
For x64-based computers: Wgx64.sys versions 11.0.1000.1091 or earlier

Re:Reasons SP1 doesn't appear in Windows Update (1, Offtopic)

westlake (615356) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800916)

This is off-topic, I suppose. But does anyone else think that in 2008 it is lame for a web forum to require HTML code for casual formatting?

Re:Reasons SP1 doesn't appear in Windows Update (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800836)

For generic stuff like the Conexant and Realtek sound card drivers you should stick to the Alsa driver rather than installing other ones, as compiling things is sometimes tricky. Are you using wrappers round windows drivers for the wireless? That can lead to problems.

Re:Reasons SP1 doesn't appear in Windows Update (1)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800886)

Sounds like Vista isn't ready for the desktop yet. :) I know it's trolling.....but I couldn't stop myself.

The company has admitted it's still not perfect. (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800584)

If you think it's beta, but it'snot, it's MS [youtube.com] ...

Let the FUD Wagon Roll (2, Insightful)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800598)

Iggy33 was just one of dozens of posters complaining about Vista Service Pack 1's effect on their PCs
Whole 'Dozens' of machines break under SP1. Quick, someone tell Bill to pull the plug!

There are specific drivers versions that the update will not work with (and will prevent installation until they're updated), and specific application versions that break too. Shocking, it's true.

Someone remind me how many binary proprietary drivers break in Linux when you upgrade the kernel? All the nvidia drivers come to mind...but I digress.

This isn't a troll, these are facts...maybe it sucks that drivers are binary proprietary blobs that get shipped with Windows, but because they are, I'd say "dozens" isn't a bad percentage. I've been running SP1 just fine for weeks btw...

Perhaps the real news here is Vista should've shipped only when SP1 came out? Win2k8 did.

Problem exists between keyboard and chair. (5, Interesting)

Sitnalta (1051230) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800610)

I installed SP1 on my desktop, laptop and several machines at work. There wasn't a single problem. My desktop had an "incompatible driver" and so I had to download SP1 from the MS website, but it installed fine and the driver is also working fine.

This sort of thing is normal with major OS updates. Even OS 10.5 had some major problems when users upgraded. And, honestly, unless you're like me and testing the service pack for work-related reasons... why are you installing it the day it was released? That's just dumb. At least wait a week.

My only real beef is you can't slipstream the new service pack into the install disk. That's going to be a pain in the ass next time I install Vista.

Something is wrong! (1)

failedlogic (627314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800620)

Something is clearly wrong. There are not supposed to be any BSODs in Vista - its supposed to be an RSOD. Perhaps these dozen people installed XP SP1??!!

Re:Something is wrong! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800862)

RSOD is a graphics related error.
BSOD is still for kernel panics.

Dozens? (2, Insightful)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800630)

'I downloaded it via Windows Update, and got a bluescreen on the third part of the update,' wrote 'Iggy33' in a comment posted Wednesday on Microsoft's Vista team blog. Iggy33 was just one of dozens of posters complaining about Vista Service Pack 1's effect on their PCs.

Not that I'm backing Microsoft, but if they only have dozens of complaints on something with an installed base that large - then I'd consider the release a rather large success.

More people had problems downloading the NIN album.

Re:Dozens? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800932)

More people had problems downloading the NIN album.

It's probably not a coincidence that both make me want to stick a red hot poker up my nose and scramble my brains!

Thus far... (1)

michrech (468134) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800644)

...I have not had any issues with the update. I installed it yesterday, on a mostly fresh install of Vista Enterprise, onto a Dell OptiPlex 745 with 2gb RAM and a C2D 6600.

I've got our trouble tracking software running (DKHelpDesk), SMS Admin Console (been using it heavily today), Visual Studio 2008, and Office 2007 installed (well, along with Firefox, JavaRE, Adobe Reader, etc).

'Course, this particular machine is used for business uses and not gaming, but, at least I'm one person without issues (so far). :)

I seriously never saw this one coming! (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800666)

The reason for that, of course, is that I'm taking the "head in the sand" approach to Vista. I deny its existence whenever and wherever possible. And when/where I cannot, I exclaim that it's not compatible with our core software tools (AutoCAD 2005 doesn't work well with Vista) and that there is actually no business case for installing Vista... and there's not. What 'requires' Vista?

(I also take a similar stand on Office 2007. Fortunately, Microsoft has helped us out by giving out the 2007 format utility to install on users machines so they can open *.docx files when they come to us.)

Re:I seriously never saw this one coming! (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800820)

What 'requires' Vista?
Purchase of a new PC (other than a Mac) in a retail store, for one thing. Developing software and testing it on Windows Vista, for another.

Re:I seriously never saw this one coming! (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800980)

Yup! I'm in the clear for quite a while! We're not buying OEM Windows on machines any longer and we don't develop software.

Re:I seriously never saw this one coming! (1)

MrSteve007 (1000823) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801048)

Says the person who's using an edition of AutoCAD that Autodesk retired all support and discounts for last week. Yeah, that's Vista's fault that you use a software suite that's nearly 4 generations old.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=7176852 [autodesk.com]

We recently upgraded to AutoCAD 2008, and 40% of our workstations are Vista. Zero problems here.

Vista's slogan... (0, Troll)

BUL2294 (1081735) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800672)

"The (w) ow is now!"

-1, Flamebait (4, Insightful)

xstonedogx (814876) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800690)

The article is schizophrenic. Rather than presenting a balanced view of SP1, it leads with unsubstantiated complaints as if that is the story, then talks about some facts (which are mostly positive) with some more complaints mixed in. Does it suck or not? This article says yes, but doesn't make a very good case for it.

"Dozens" of users of unknown levels of technical knowledge (out of millions of users) issued anecdotal complaints.

"Bikkja" said that "after installing SP1 things seem to go really slow, even though my computer shouldn't have any problems."


Firstly, is 'seem' a technical term? How do we know whether it went slower or not? Secondly a little reading would have told this guy that SuperFetch was basically rebooted by the install, which will make things slower for those using it until it catches back up.

Other troubles reported by Vista SP1 users ranged from a simple inability to download the software from Microsoft's Windows Update site...


There are several reasons for this, the most important that a previous update allows Windows to scan for drivers incompatible with SP1 and prevent download so as not to break the system (which TFA mentions).

...to sudden spikes in memory usage. "Went from using 650 MB RAM idle to 1 Gig... I'll be switching back," said "Kurrier."


So? What is with this obsession with memory usage? Idle RAM has a slightly negative value - it does nothing while still consuming a non-zero amount of energy. How RAM is used is much more important than whether or not it is used. Now, it may be that this guy only has 1 GB of RAM. It could be that this is the result of a problem. But who knows? Not the author.

Some had 'insightful' comments complaining about increased memory usage. Memory usage is a worthless metric! How memory is usage is more important than how much - and really, would you rather have that RAM in use making your system respond faster, or would you rather have it sit there doing nothing? There's some give and take here, but complaining about memory usage without context is meaningless.

The feature was plagued by false alarms that flagged thousands of legitimate Vista users as software pirates.


A legitimate (if unsubstantiated by the article) complaint, but well known before SP1 and really even before Vista.

Idle RAM (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800940)

Idle RAM has a slightly negative value - it does nothing while still consuming a non-zero amount of energy.
It takes time and energy to spin a hard drive to save and load the contents of RAM whenever I hibernate or otherwise power cycle a PC.

Memory usage is a worthless metric! How memory is usage is more important than how much - and really, would you rather have that RAM in use making your system respond faster, or would you rather have it sit there doing nothing?
The perception is that memory managers in Windows brand operating systems have tended to manage memory less efficiently than operating systems using a Linux kernel, especially on a system that's within a few percent of thrashing because I'm trying to squeeze the last year of use out of a PC that already has 75 percent or more of the RAM that its motherboard is designed to hold.

Biased? (2, Interesting)

rickmus (872230) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800692)

Most of us have to use Microsoft products in one way or another. It would be nice if SlashDot wasn't so blatantly negative and biased towards them. Or can some one recommend a technology news site that gives me a fair assessment of cool stuff?

I agree (5, Funny)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800938)

I agree.

That's why when I want an even-handed tech assessment, I always go here first:

        http://www.microsoftisawesome.com/ [microsoftisawesome.com]

Re:Biased? Try this site! (-1, Troll)

purpleraison (1042004) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800942)

Try http://microsoft.com/ [microsoft.com]

They have a lot of positive, and useful things to say about Microsoft products. In fact, they are so pro-Microsoft, you'd think they made Windows...

Yep. (2, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800694)

Service Pack 1 is all it's cracked up to be, all right.

Shocking.. (1)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800726)

Well I for am *install linux* shocked to *install linux* see this kind of *install linux* article on *install linux* slashdot. Look at the thousands of upset customers... wait.. hundreds... er tens? Of course the majority of reports you'll hear about SP1 is its problems and not successes. People only seem to bitch when something doesn't work and they don't say much when it does work right.

This just in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22800734)

Windows user's PC Crashes after OS update. News at ten.

How do I spell "debacle"? (0, Troll)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800744)

V-I-S-T-A, debacle!

Everyone's still waiting for SP1 to go to Vista??? (2, Funny)

BUL2294 (1081735) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800786)

Hah! Looks like corporations and end-users like me should wait for SP2 or maybe even SP3!

Re:Everyone's still waiting for SP1 to go to Vista (1)

Teran9 (1163643) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800946)

Sort of like the Winnt 3.x and 4.0 days. You never rolled out the new version before the 2nd service pack.

Interesting (1)

dedazo (737510) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800834)

The article on Digg about SP1 didn't have a single comment about any problems. Neither did I notice any on the reddit ones.

Not to say that there aren't any, but of course as usual the negatives have to be amplified and exaggerated in the name of freedom and ad impressions.

Vista Pirates????? (1)

newnerdyuser (191770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800846)

SP1 will also remove from Vista the so-called Kill Switch -- a feature that deactivated key components of the OS if Microsoft detected users were not running a properly licensed copy of Vista.
The feature was plagued by false alarms that flagged thousands of legitimate Vista users as software pirates.
I'm shocked! Do people really pirate Vista?

Sp1! (1)

BinLadder (1256056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800878)

Sp1 works fine, no problem with it! it goes against my slacking religion though...dont want my system to reboot....

Newflash! (5, Funny)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800894)

This just in: somewhere, someone on the Internet complains about something. More at 11.

Can m$ make _working_ products anymore????? (-1, Troll)

Doug52392 (1094585) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800898)

It seems that their products are complelty unstable and useless, and are outragously expensive for what they are... crapware :)

It seems m$'s problem is ALL THEY CARE ABOUT NOW IS $$$, not the quality or stability of their products.

Windows XP: Okay. Although I found Linux to be much better, at least XP was usable. Only 2 versions.

Windows Vista: Outragously expensive with 6 DAMN VERSIONS, all of them give you the same shitty operating system. Constant nag screens, Cancel/Allow dialogs, horrible performance for gaming and media playback (Any games older than 2005 screw up on my system with my new nVidia 8600GT graphics card)... it goes on and on.

And it's not just OSes. Even their games suck.

Xbox: Good system, doesn't blow up, 1 version, good online play, best system on the market in it's time

Xbox 360: Horrible system, huge risk of blowing it up and getting an RRoD, 4-6 DAMN VERSIONS (notice the trend here, we go from 1 to 4 versions of the Xbox 360, and 2 to 6 versions of Windows Vista), now useless HD-DVD, outragously pathetic attempts to rip off the consumers ($50 a year just to play games online with Xbox Live, $10 DLC thats FREE on the PC and PS3), targeted at kids so they don't understand they're being scammed.

Halo 3: Overhyped, mediocre, 3 DAMN VERSIONS (again, notice the trend with versions and editions), low quality, rushed just to make $$$, $10 DLC every few months (3 damn maps for $10, what a ripoff), aimed at kids because of how much of a ripoff it is, etc.

Notice the trend here? Over capitalism, a complete loss of quality and performance, and they just rip you off.

m$ is going down soon. Like every company, they can't last forever.

Whats wrong with you folks??? (1)

cyberzephyr (705742) | more than 6 years ago | (#22800970)

I have just finished installing SP1 on my standalone machine and have been dreading every darn thing i have heard about it off of /. Blue and purple screens of death and the whole nine yards.

It pisses me off that there are people who for some reason forget to RTFM! I bet most of the folks who got SP1 that failed did not RTFM and downloaded the version that MS or M$ if you want, warned you that it would give you the problems that you, who did not RTFM probably got because you think you know more so you don't RTFM!

On me, I have ZERO problems at all and i will be waiting because you who have been slamming SP1 had me scared and now i'm simply not anymore... Only hesitant.

Thanks for the FUD!

Ancient Chinese Secret (1)

Chas (5144) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801004)

Upgrade to XP.

Modern Chinese Secret

Only apply SP1 to a VERY fresh (preferrably newly installed) Vista install. It's sounding like SP1 is HIGHLY intolerant of "crufty" installs (see: installs that have actually been used for more than 5 seconds by a real end-user).

I hate to say it (2, Interesting)

GlL (618007) | more than 6 years ago | (#22801012)

but the OS actually works now.

After installing the service pack certain things are incredibly faster.
1) startup: Before installing the service pack it took my computer (Hell laptop with 1.6ghz dual core AMD processor, 4GB RAM) 20 minutes to become usable. Now I can use my computer within 2 minutes of logging in to my domain. It seems like the indexing that happens actually runs in the backgroung and doesn't interfere with apps that you want to run in the foreground.
2) Browsing the domain network. Before installing the service pack, I could double-click on Network and watch the green bar slowly crawl across the top until finally after 5 minutes computers would appear. Now it is instantaneous.
3) Outlook 07 (probably related to the indexing changes). Before installing the service pack it took 5 minutes for Outlook to become usable and half the time it would tell me the local file closed incorrectly and it would now "repair" the file. Now Outlook takes abetween 20 and 40 seconds to be usable and downloading e-mail is much quicker. I haven't gotten the Incorrect file closure message yet either, and I have been opening and closing Outlook all day.

The new remote desktop removed the stupid login window.

The only thing I need to check on is if you still can't change IP settings when you first sign on. It used to take 5 minutes to be able to change IP settings.

The only complaint I have is that installing the Service Pack took alittle over 4 hours.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?