backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 31 comment(s) - last by KamiXkaze.. on Aug 1 at 1:15 AM
Microsoft tackles some of Vista more annoying problems

Windows Vista was released to businesses in late November and to consumers in late January. Over the past eight months, numerous issues have cropped up with the operating system and Microsoft has been hard at work in solving them.

According to a posting at nV News, Microsoft has issued two comprehensive software patches to testers which resolve a laundry list of Windows Vista issues. The "938979 Vista Performance and Reliability Pack" improves performance when copying/moving large files, copying/moving large directories with large amounts of data and resuming from hibernate.  Other problems addressed include fixes to Vista's Memory Manager and an issue where a computer would lose its default Gateway address when resuming from sleep.

The "938194 Vista Compatibility and Reliability Pack" contains a variety of updates to improve the reliability and compatibility of graphics cards and printers. Also included are enhancements to HD DVD/Blu-ray playback on large monitors.

The two update packs are technically only available to Windows Vista testers. However, a brave nV News forum subscriber posted a link where anyone can download the two update packs in x86 and x64 versions.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Windows Update Rollups
By BMFPitt on 7/30/2007 9:13:45 AM , Rating: 5
Microsoft really should come out with quarterly rollups of all their patches since the last service pack. I love using nLite/vLite to slipstream my OS installs with all my drivers, but it's near impossible to keep up with the updates other than service packs.

Seems like a waste of bandwidth on Microsoft's part to have me download the same updates every 6 months or so (and multiple times if I'm doing more than one machine.)




RE: Windows Update Rollups
By OrSin on 7/30/2007 9:18:44 AM , Rating: 1
I would like quarterly too.
I'm have all the problems listed in this article. Some I thought was motherboard relate but it might be vista now after reading this. Anyone else hate the way most P35 MB add ide support, with the scsi emulator. And I dont plan on give up my IDE DVD writer until something affordable abd better comes alone and right now Blue-ray and HD-dvd dont cut it.


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By omnicronx on 7/30/2007 9:25:19 AM , Rating: 3
Basically i think it has more to do with knowing full well a service pack will work on most setups without major issues before it can be released.

If i a quarterly release was done, you would think many more problems would arise. I know full well, when the company i work for upgrades to the next service pack, they have tested almost every update one at a time to make sure everything works with their system. SP2 for XP was a big problem for many companies when they tried to implement it, many took weeks in order to get a stable working setup, (network setting especially)


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By BMFPitt on 7/30/2007 9:56:43 AM , Rating: 2
So then a quarterly rollup would decrease the chances of a bad setup, because you'd be installing one thing rather than 100. Unless you're making the assumption that Microsoft wouldn't do any validation whatsoever on the package, which you may be.

Even if it failed and messed up the install 50% of the time (absurdly high) and you had to reinstall the current way, it would be faster on average in the long term than just doing it the current way.


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By omnicronx on 7/30/2007 10:10:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Even if it failed and messed up the install 50% of the time (absurdly high) and you had to reinstall the current way, it would be faster on average in the long term than just doing it the current way.


huh? to have to test and update your whole system every four months is just ridiculous from a business standpoint. Business's need the time to apply one update let alone a whole service pack. You can not just take a service pack and expect it to work system wide, it just does not happen.
Microsoft probably also does extensive testing on service packs before they are released, especially since the main reason for service packs, are business/security related, you would think they would spend half the time making sure all the updates work with different systems. Also remember SP2 again as an example, it took many business's 6 months to upgrade to sp2.

Just try and think how many of those useless windows updates you've downloaded on to your home computer that you have absolutely no need for.


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By BMFPitt on 7/30/2007 11:03:26 AM , Rating: 2
My employer has all Windows updates installed as they roll out. Therefore you wouldn't be getting anything with this that you wouldn't be getting otherwise.

If your company does not currently do this, then it stands to reason that they would not use the rollup either, so why care? Giving the option to those who would benefit from it doesn't hurt your company.
quote:
Just try and think how many of those useless windows updates you've downloaded on to your home computer that you have absolutely no need for.
Net result of my losing 0-5min of productivity. Except my way would make it faster during a reinstall.


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By omnicronx on 7/30/2007 12:14:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If your company does not currently do this, then it stands to reason that they would not use the rollup either, so why care? Giving the option to those who would benefit from it doesn't hurt your company.


So why care? every company sets their network/system up differently, as a result the amount of things that MS could potentially test for to go wrong is not very high. In large corporations (amazingly MS's biggest customers) updates are applied very carefully and are tested thoroughly before applying it to their system. It would be very very costly and not very efficient to do these updates as they come in, as one update could have unforeseen consequences on another.

This is not usually a problem with smaller business's and home users, thats the only thing i am trying to get out there. Infact a servicepack 8 months into a new OS release is crazy in my opinion, unless MS is banking on the fact business's are waiting for Sp1 to start to implement vista in the first place, instead of having to change your system to the original vista build, which probably takes enough time on its own, then to the new service pack in less than 8 months(we will be seeing a service pack very soon) ;)

Quarterly roll outs would be great.. for the home user, but as i said before you are not MS's biggest customer are you ;)


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By BMFPitt on 7/30/2007 3:47:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Quarterly roll outs would be great.. for the home user, but as i said before you are not MS's biggest customer are you ;)
Using that logic, would you recommend that they discontinue all Home OSes?

If you don't download 80% of updates now, why would it be so hard to not download differently packaged ones?


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By synmnky on 7/30/2007 10:05:05 AM , Rating: 5
AutoPatcher ( http://autopatcher.com/ ) has all the updates in one download (as well as other stuff like MSN messenger and WMP). You can run the downloaded file on multiple machines rather than downloading everything again.

It's not an official Microsoft method, but they don't seem to mind their updates being bundled and redistributed by these guys.


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By omnicronx on 7/30/2007 10:12:48 AM , Rating: 3
wow thats *** cool, the time wasted updating windows =S...
someone give this guy a good rating :)


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By BMFPitt on 7/30/2007 11:04:19 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks!


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By lumbergeek on 7/30/2007 1:20:44 PM , Rating: 3
That is the most useful post I have EVER read on Dailytech, my own included. You, sir, have won my admiration.


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By pckiller00 on 7/30/2007 3:55:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AutoPatcher ( http://autopatcher.com/ ) has all the updates in one download (as well as other stuff like MSN messenger and WMP). You can run the downloaded file on multiple machines rather than downloading everything again.


Yes AutoPatcher is an excellent tool, all updates monthly in one application, download the version you need, AutoPatcher for say XP or 2003 and apply the patches u need. Also for XP users you can also make use of MSFN's RVM Post XP SP2 Update Pack, you the RVM integrator, the patch, and integrate into your windows installation cd. A different approach but works just as good.


RE: Windows Update Rollups
By KamiXkaze on 8/1/2007 1:15:51 AM , Rating: 2
Good catch thanks

KxK


Are they working on the slowness issue?
By Snoop on 7/30/2007 11:33:04 AM , Rating: 2
Just wondering if anything is being done about how slow vista feels vs XP. Maybe its just me, but my 2500+ athlon on xp feels a lot faster than my 5000+ Athlon x2 on vista (not too mention xp on my 5000). From bootup to shutdown, and really any sort of tasks, the xp machine just does seems much quicker.




RE: Are they working on the slowness issue?
By toyota on 7/30/2007 1:01:26 PM , Rating: 1
slight exaggeration Snoop? I have an old Compaq with the Athlon 2500 and of course Windows XP and it is dog ass slow compared to my newer HP 5000 X2 Vista comp.


By omnicronx on 7/30/2007 1:31:44 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I have an old Compaq with the Athlon 2500 and of course Windows XP and it is dog ass slow compared to my newer HP 5000 X2 Vista comp.


Vista is not the not the cpu hog everyone is making it out to be. Vista is a memory hog though, and although xp can run smoothly on 512M ram, i would recommend at least 1gig to run vista smoothly. I recently upgraded from 512m to 2gigs, and the difference is night and day. If you are bold enough to venture into the 64bit world, vista 64 in my books requires atleast 2gigs of ram too run smoothly and was nearly inoprable with the 512ram when tested.

btw i my cpu is a s939 opteron 170 ;) (4000 X2 ish)


RE: Are they working on the slowness issue?
By Snoop on 7/30/2007 2:07:51 PM , Rating: 2
No I am not exaggerating. As I said maybe its just me. My 2500+ xp machine has 1.5gb of memory, my 5000 X2 with vista has 3gb, and my laptop Core 2 Duo 1.8(i think) with Vista has 2gb. Apps I’m using which 'seem' slower are sql 2005, .net, office 2003 and just in general vista feels less snappy :D. I use these computers side by side in my office so it really is not difficult to compare them and there is a noticeable difference 'for me.'
I bought the laptop about a month ago and I chalked up its relative sluggishness to the fact it has a laptop drive, etc. But now it is somewhat shocking my brand new 5000 X2 doesn’t seem much better. I have not run XP on the 5000 yet, but I can imagine it would run well.


By omnicronx on 7/30/2007 2:18:43 PM , Rating: 2
Well you are either exaggerating, or you have some major drivers/performance issues that have nothing to do with vista. I have an 2500+ barton(running at 3200+ speeds) running vista with 1gig of ram, and it is dwarfed in comparison of speed with my dual core opteron 170 with 2 gigs of ram.

Xp drivers have been optimized over time and tend to work better than the current generation of vista drivers. Try removing your motherboard and graphics drivers and start from scratch, this could help you.


RE: Are they working on the slowness issue?
By arazok on 7/30/2007 1:41:05 PM , Rating: 4
If anything, I'm finding Vista faster then XP. The key is the prefetcher which loads your most commonly used apps into memory before you even run them. You'll need 2+ gigs to really see this in action.

Also, if you are booting and shutting down your PC, then you will certainly suffer long waits. Use sleep mode, it's like an instant boot and my favorite feature after prefetching.


RE: Are they working on the slowness issue?
By omnicronx on 7/30/2007 2:14:08 PM , Rating: 2
xp still prefetche's, in fact the technology from xp is called prefetch where as vista's is called superfetch. As you mentioned if you don't have at least 2gig ram it could potentially degrade performance (probably why 512m ram performance is so bad). Since whenever something is prefetched and you do something that requires space on the ram where the prefetch is located, it is moves what is cached back into the virtual memory on your hard drive, actually degrading performance ;)

Vista heavily relies on prefetch, and is implemented much better than on xp.