backtop

Software Vista Service Pack 1 Set for 2H'07 Release
Brandon Hill (Blog) - January 23, 2007 1:00 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 51 comment(s) - last by b1lk1.. on Feb 7 at 9:09 AM
Microsoft prepares for Vista Service Pack 1

Many consumers and businesses make the decision to stay away from new Windows releases until the first service pack becomes available. According to internal Microsoft emails, the first service pack for Windows Vista could come as early as this year.

Bink.nu posted an email in its entirety which details Microsoft's plans for the service pack and the role that it expects testers to play in the development of the first major update for Vista. Microsoft is looking to tackle "regressions from Windows Vista and Windows XP, security, deployment blockers and other high impact issues [as its] primary focus for the Service Pack.  The Windows TAP team will work with customers to identify and drive these issues."

Microsoft is betting heavily on its customers and partners to ensure that Service Pack 1 is available before the end of 2007. Microsoft lays out these requirements for customers looking to join the Technology Adoption Program (TAP):

  • Customers must deploy pre-release versions of Service Pack into production environments at each major milestone (Beta, RC, RTM) within 30 days of the milestone release.
  • Customers must meet or exceed predetermined deployment count goals for each milestone.
  • Customers must actively provide feedback on all builds made available to them through emails, surveys, conference calls, and filing bugs and DCRs.
  • Customers must send 1-2 individuals to Redmond for onsite training events.

Windows Vista was released to business customers on November 30 and will hit retail shelves on January 30. Customers looking to grab a copy of Vista ahead of the official retail launch can grab OEM copies now online.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
SP1
By restrada on 1/23/2007 1:29:43 PM , Rating: 5
I think Microsoft is releasing SP1 early to get businesses to quickly adopt Vista.




RE: SP1
By danz32 on 1/23/2007 1:31:50 PM , Rating: 3
I would disagree...Mircosoft is releasing SP1 to update Vista with that of Windows Server 2007. It just so happens that the two are close together


RE: SP1
By encryptkeeper on 1/23/2007 3:37:07 PM , Rating: 3
Mircosoft is releasing SP1 to update Vista with that of Windows Server 2007. It just so happens that the two are close together

Don't be so naive to believe this is the only reason. People didn't know it with 98, and they didn't realize it until after the fact with XP, but now they KNOW they'd better stay away from Microsoft products until a service pack comes out. Saying they'll have a service pack this soon doesn't mean there's something invariably WRONG (that we don't already know about) it's a marketing tool to assuage the "No new OS for me until there's a service pack" fears. Just be glad Microsoft doesn't do what SUSE Linux and others do, which is give you the OS for free then charge you out the ass for updates (and only sell you ONE year of updates at a time).


RE: SP1
By Shintai on 1/23/2007 4:52:03 PM , Rating: 4
MS wants to keep 1 codebase instead of several. Cheaper and faster/more efficient to bugfix.

Its been known for about a year.

Thats why SP1 will come with Windows Server 2007. Not anything else.


RE: SP1
By Micronite on 1/23/2007 6:18:44 PM , Rating: 3
With all the beta testing that has been done on Vista, I think they're justified in issuing a Service Release that soon.
I suspect Vista will be as desirable at SP1 as XP was at SP1.
Not to take away from that fact that it's probably motivated by the desire to get people on Vista, but I just think it's a smart move altogether.


RE: SP1
By raven3x7 on 1/24/2007 1:04:19 AM , Rating: 2
Quote: 'what SUSE Linux and others do, which is give you the OS for free then charge you out the ass for updates (and only sell you ONE year of updates at a time).'

That is a blatant lie! Suse does not charge for updates, everything related to OpenSuse is free. www.opensuse.org check it out if you dont believe me.


RE: SP1
By WxGuy192 on 1/23/2007 1:35:57 PM , Rating: 3
I agree... At first, I was surprised they'd release SP1 so soon after Vista is introduced. Then, however, I realized that many businesses (and individuals, for that matter) don't upgrade until SP1 under the premise that any major bugs will be fixed by that time.

FWIW, Microsoft is in a pickle when it comes to new OSs and updates to previous OSs. Some Macfans praise Apple's Mac OS because of the frequent new features, but they fail to realize that frequently upgrading to a new OS is not practical for many business or enterprise environments (particularly if you include training time and expense). Some business IT pros complain that Windows updates too often anyway, while many individuals would like new and better features more often.


RE: SP1
By dice1111 on 1/23/2007 2:56:43 PM , Rating: 2
SP2 is the new SP1!

I guess that everyone should actaully be waiting for SP2 to adopt to avoid all the headaches.

A little too "see through" there, Microsoft...


RE: SP1
By crimson117 on 1/23/2007 3:24:42 PM , Rating: 2
Sadly, if everyone waits, then few bugs will be uncovered and fixed by the time the service pack is released. So the pre-SP1 customers are essentially relied upon as beta testers.


RE: SP1
By cyberguyz on 1/23/2007 3:39:07 PM , Rating: 2
So, does mean we all get to pay up to $500 to be Microsoft's beta testers.

I'll wait until the new release bugs are gone first thanks. I ain't Micrsoft's testbed!


RE: SP1
By encryptkeeper on 1/23/2007 3:41:05 PM , Rating: 2
Congratulations! You just won yourself a job as a Microsoft New Operating Systems designer and marketing planner!


RE: SP1
By Supa on 1/23/2007 2:14:44 PM , Rating: 2
Guess MS won't release XP SP3 until 2008. And it will probably be just collections of patches without new feature, just so people will upgrade to Vista rather than staying with XP.


---


RE: SP1
By Russell on 1/23/2007 2:28:55 PM , Rating: 3
Why would you add features to a 6 year old product that has already been replaced?


RE: SP1
By ZeeStorm on 1/23/2007 4:26:48 PM , Rating: 2
Replaced? I assure you that XP is hardly being replaced. I see the lifespan of XP for at least 5 more years. I think once computers finally reach over 6-7ghz on average and under $500, people might start dropping XP. Frankly, I don't want a computer that's going to use MORE resources just for a pretty look. That's not my cup of tea. If I wanted that, I'd be using DesktopX or some crap.


RE: SP1
By glennpratt on 1/24/2007 12:55:01 AM , Rating: 3
Umm, just because you haven't replace your 2001 Nissan Altima doesn't mean Nissan hasn't replaced it.


RE: SP1
By DigitalFreak on 1/23/2007 3:25:39 PM , Rating: 2
It's HIGHLY doubtful there will be another service pack for XP. You may see a security roll-up like they did with Windows 2000, but that's it.


RE: SP1
By Shintai on 1/23/2007 4:53:41 PM , Rating: 2
XP Sp3 is on MS roadmap. So would be odd if they didn´t.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/service...


RE: SP1
By killerroach on 1/23/2007 4:32:17 PM , Rating: 2
Keep this in mind... XP SP1 came out ten months after the release of XP to retail. Ten months after Vista's launch is the end of November, well within that window. Doesn't sound that odd to me, other than that they're letting people know way ahead of time this go-round. Almost like they're going out of their way to convince people to hold off buying Vista.


RE: SP1
By Shintai on 1/23/2007 4:54:48 PM , Rating: 2
You cant compare the 2. Vista SP1 is only due there due to Windows Server 2007 gets released there. Its to keep 1 codebase for both.


RE: SP1
By frobizzle on 1/23/2007 5:11:48 PM , Rating: 2
Well, if Microsoft is as good at keeping to their schedule with SP1 as they were with Vista, SP1 should be available sometime in early 2009.


Interesting!!
By rippleyaliens on 1/23/2007 1:28:08 PM , Rating: 2
I am first to say, that i really like Microsoft Products, not neccessarly for the cost, (definetly), but more so, it allows easier integration, with their own products. WITH that said.
I AM PISSED, you have got to be kidding me, People cannot even buy vista, and there is talk of a Service pack already. I grow tired of teh endless updates, 20 machines is 1 thing, but a 2,000 pc network, (frown BADLY)...




RE: Interesting!!
By GreenEnvt on 1/23/2007 1:47:10 PM , Rating: 2
Download WSUS, it certainly saves you a ton of bandwidth. I've been running the current Version 3 beta 2 for a couple of months.


RE: Interesting!!
By bnme on 1/23/2007 1:54:31 PM , Rating: 2
Try to let any other software company manage the install base Microsoft has with Windows, along with the various systems Windows runs on.

Every OS that is widely used, whether it is Windows, Linux, or OSX, is constantly being patched (and for most users, it's seamless and in the background with auto-updates).

It might be fickle to do it on a large scale network, as any bug update might break something that's working, but these problems affect all OS's.

They usually add new features (which they did with XP) with the SP's anyways. Hey, minor revisions, and quickly too!


RE: Interesting!!
By DigitalFreak on 1/23/2007 3:27:47 PM , Rating: 2
Dude, if you're still sneakernet updating 2000 PCs, you have bigger problems.


RE: Interesting!!
By sotti on 1/23/2007 3:30:03 PM , Rating: 2
Service packs are part of life, they were already discussing service pack 1 before RTM.

Software products have a life cycle and to deny that SP1 and SP2 will exist is asinine. Best to plan for what you know then say only if Vista has bugs will we make SP1.


RE: Interesting!!
By Spivonious on 1/23/2007 3:31:45 PM , Rating: 2
You know, there is this thing called automatic updates...


RE: Interesting!!
By otispunkmeyer on 1/24/2007 4:11:03 AM , Rating: 2
we have a program we use here that downloads the updates 1 time, then distrobutes copies to each computer which then update simultaneously - you dont actually have to do any work at all i dont think, its all automagic. you can have as many PC's as you like and you'll of only downloaded the patches/SP's once


I can only hope
By AlexWade on 1/23/2007 2:45:18 PM , Rating: 2
Hopefully, it will fix the tons of annoyances that Vista adds. Like a cryptic boot loader that you need to be a high level Microsoft engineer to even begin to comprehend it. Or removing the very important run command by default. Or make everyone a limited user instead of an annoyed limited administrator. Or make it easy to be become a full administrator. Vista has potential, it just needs a lot of work.




RE: I can only hope
By Wonga on 1/23/2007 3:27:44 PM , Rating: 4
While I would personally want an administrator account with all the bells and whistles attached, I can understand why Microsoft is setting up a limited account by default.

If a person isn't smart enough to set their account privilages to administrator mode, perhaps they should still with the limited account after all.


RE: I can only hope
By Wonga on 1/23/2007 3:29:13 PM , Rating: 2
and when I say "still" I mean "stick".

(Edit feature??? ;)


RE: I can only hope
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/23/2007 5:15:59 PM , Rating: 2
Actually you get an administrator account by default (If your on any of the higher priced versions).... However if you've played with Vista you will notice even the Admin account required you to constantly click ok to everything it tries to do. This can be disabled sure, but its nice to know when people are doing shit they aren't supposed to.


SP is an obvious way around silly IT procedures
By Flunk on 1/23/2007 1:42:42 PM , Rating: 4
Most businesses have hard policies to only implement Microsoft products after the first service pack. I think it's obvious that MS wants to get Vista out to as many customer as possible as fast as possible. I'm not saying SP won't improve the OS, just that the motivation behind a quick release schedule is to satisfy corporate policies that frankly make no sense to begin with. I work in an IT department and I find that new updates are just as likely to contain issues as the initial product, sometimes more so because they are generally not tested as thoroughly.

This is probably a good policy on Microsoft's part but the "waiting for the first service pack" model is completely rediculous.




RE: SP is an obvious way around silly IT procedures
By Russell on 1/23/2007 2:30:54 PM , Rating: 1
I don't believe that's why they're doing this. Vista was rushed to be released early. This SP1 will be the "finished" Vista. Had they held back releasing it until it was "done", then it would have been released around the time this SP comes out (perhaps a bit earlier due to added testing).


By WxGuy192 on 1/23/2007 5:50:40 PM , Rating: 2
They rushed it? I was originally supposed to be released when? Mid-2005? We're almost 2 yrs beyond that. It's bee in Beta for how long?

Sure, they could keep adding new features and working on what they have, but you can always say that. It's like buying a computer... Sure, you could buy the best now, or wait for the next generation of CPU, but they'll be a newer one set to be released a year after that one. Keeping up with the latest-n-greatest is always a cat and mouse game. They are always working on something newer and better; but, at some time, they have to release a product. I don't think an OS will ever be perfect, full-featured, and completely bug-free, if for no other reason than new hardware is constantly being developed that can allow the OS to do more and do what it does better.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/23/2007 5:17:57 PM , Rating: 2
Amen to that Flunk. Most corporate IT policies were written back in DOS and Win 3.1. I regularly look at ours and wonder what the hell they were thinking keeping such policies around all these years later. But thats how policy gets started. Nobody ever questions it afterwards.


What makes up SP 1.
By crystal clear on 1/24/2007 3:08:03 AM , Rating: 2
" Microsoft prepares for Vista Service Pack 1"

Put the following below together, it makes your service pack 1.

Quote-

What kinds of things aren't ready? Mostly drivers. Microsoft is including more than 19,000 "in the box", but expects to have another 12,000 available via Microsoft Update. Some of the drivers available so far are still considered beta, are somewhat unstable or do not support the full feature set of the devices. And Microsoft's own Application Compatibility Toolkit (unimportant for consumers, but very important for enterprises) and Windows Mobile Device Center (important for enterprises and consumers) are also still in beta.

http://vista.blog.gartner.com/blog/index.php?catid...

"troublesome first impressions"
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5788

Also the information below has been floating around for quite some time-

Microsoft has planned a 'Vista R2', codenamed 'Fiji' which will be released some time in 2008. And after Fiji, there will be Windows 'Vienna'. Windows Fiji, will not be a totally different OS from Vista; but it will be an add-on. Whereas Vienna will be totally different from Vista."






RE: What makes up SP 1.
By PrinceGaz on 1/24/2007 4:26:56 AM , Rating: 2
Not your personal comment, but from Gartner who you quoted
quote:
And Microsoft's own Application Compatibility Toolkit (unimportant for consumers, but very important for enterprises)

I personally find the Microsoft ACT very useful at home when playing old games as it has a surprising number of fixes for them which are automatically used when playing and/or installing them. Scrolling through the (very long) list of applications in the Compatibility Administrator, I reckon that about half of the applications listed are games, and some of the fixes it applies are ones that are not available without having the ACT installed. At any rate it is more elegant than the sledgehammer approach of using Windows 98 Compatibility mode (which like all those modes actually consists of a pre-defined bundle of fixes) or whatever to try to get old games working.

The ACT may be unimportant to consumers who don't play old games (or use any other older software), but I believe it should be considered an essential install for those who do play older games, especially those released before 2002. Contrary to what some people might believe, the ACT is totally transparent and requires no end-user interaction for the fixes it includes to be applied when needed; you only need to dabble with it if you want to make your own custom fixes. Why it isn't installed as standard puzzles me.


RE: What makes up SP 1.
By crystal clear on 1/24/2007 5:16:18 AM , Rating: 2
"Why it isn't installed as standard puzzles me. "

Its still "beta"-this prompts me to say:

If I was YOU I would write to MS on this-who knows, may be
MS could accept your suggestion.
Give it a try.


RE: What makes up SP 1.
By crystal clear on 1/24/2007 5:08:03 AM , Rating: 2
Further additions to my post-

Quote (Toms Hardware)
Security has become a dominating feature of new software - security software itself is getting more sophisticated, battling more threats, not just viruses, than ever and even Microsoft touts the new Windows Vista as the "most secure Windows ever", thanks to its new Firewall and integrated "Windows Defender". But Brian Grayek, vice president of threat content development at CA, believes that such claims can lure users into a false sense of security and actually create new dangers.-

In terms of the security provided by Windows Vista, he mentioned that it would be dangerous to rely on the increased security of the software alone. "That would be like saying 'I've just built the most secure in the world, so I do not need a security system'," he said. He stated that CA believes that major security flaws in Vista will be found "within a year." The fact that additional security software and education of users is required to protect computers would not be changed with Vista, he said.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/01/19/security_threat/


Unquote-

Pls note this-

"CA believes that major security flaws in Vista will be found "within a year."


By rhog on 1/24/2007 2:02:18 PM , Rating: 2
I have access and have installed 3 versions of Windows Vista RTM Ultimate (not a beta the real thing) and if you have an NVIDIA Chipset or a raid setup good luck on installing it hardware support is almost nonexistent. The hardware drivers are sorely lacking and I hope that it will be fixed soon. Vista is a nice OS if you have the horsepower and at least 2GB of memory (1GB is not enough trust me) It has a few good features but I do not think with the DRM issues and driver support (which BTW if you want WHQL certification you must submit 64bit as well as 32bit drivers) that Vista will take off any time soon. AS for SP1 believe me they need it! Remember XP RTM? Same idea with Vista




Fanboyisn over an OS
By b1lk1 on 2/7/2007 9:06:52 AM , Rating: 2
I am not trying to overtly flame or offend people, but I have yet to see the level of fanboyism over an OS as the posts here by many people. The way that any negative comment is greeted by hostility makes me wonder if M$ is sending their employees here to patrol the board to make sure nothing bad is posted about their latest dysfunctional OS. Noone has to agree one way or another on the "functionality" of Vista, but why would anyone openly praise M$ for the need to release SP1 so quickly for ANY product. XP was a garbage bad full of entrails when it was released and it seems that Vista is following suit. Using 500MB of ram for a pretty desktop is no excuse for charging what they do for the "priviledge" of owning their latest bugfest. I want XP SP3. I want DX-10 for XP. Why do I need to get Vista for DX-10 when we all know XP will easily run it? XP's lifecycle is estimated at 5 more years. There is no good reason other than greed that XP will never see DX-10. You may like Vista, but there are a great many of us that don't. Instead of lashing out and tossing negatives out against people stating their opinions, give me some really good logical reasons that I need to upgrade from XP.




No Vista for me
By kextyn on 1/23/07, Rating: -1
RE: No Vista for me
By jak3676 on 1/23/2007 3:13:55 PM , Rating: 2
The presence of a service package has nothing to do with it actually. All the DoD componants already have a fielding plan in place for Vista. The Air Force is first up this time. Do some research on Joint Task Force for Global Network Operations (JTF-GNO) and Vista. Some of the new security features are already being mandated.

Depending on where you are, you'll begin seeing Vista throughout the DoD in 12-24 months. That's about the same timeline as alot of other large buisinesses.


RE: No Vista for me
By Alexstarfire on 1/24/2007 12:24:15 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, Microsoft sucks, but unfortunately it's so widespread that we don't have much of a choice. If Linux could get a little more unified, like only one version, then we could all move to something open source. You aren't supposed to make an OS then just expect to have to make a Service Pack for it. I can't say that it wouldn't be likely to happen, because it's a Microsoft product it's pretty likely regardless, but still. If it's supposed to be such a great and secure system, why are we to expect an update to fix problems.

Also, why are OSes starting to take up more and more resources, shouldn't that be going the other way around about now. Don't get me wrong, it had to go up from MSDOS, but once we got to Windows 95 the resources should have started going down after that. I shouldn't be expected to get more RAM just to run a god d@mn OS. X uses too many as it is, which is why nLite has become so popular. It'll just keep getting more popular the more bloated the OS becomes. It wouldn't be so bad to have all these new features if it used the same amount of resources, or power, as the OS before it.


RE: No Vista for me
By b1lk1 on 2/7/2007 9:09:53 AM , Rating: 2
Just look at the requirements M$ is putting out for beta testers for SP1. Beta testers should not have to shell out the money it costs to run this OS and face the possible security issues. I just do not understand why people put up with it.


By KaiserCSS on 1/23/2007 1:53:57 PM , Rating: 5
To quote an annonymous refugee from Half-Life 2:

"I'm not even gonna tell you to SHUT UP."


By theprodigalrebel on 1/23/2007 2:17:14 PM , Rating: 4
So now you have a problem with getting support for an OS? I'm supposed to be furious my OS (and every other software I have) gets periodic updates, feature packs and service packs?

Get bent, troll.


By Dg01 on 1/23/2007 4:43:41 PM , Rating: 3
hahahaha

When someone bashes microsoft here they are called a troll,
yet when someone bashes sony they are a hero.

cracks me up

MS ftl


By JimFear on 1/24/2007 5:35:14 AM , Rating: 2
Well if you bash Windows you're rooting for either the mac zealots or the linux monsters...lolzor!

I've been using Vista for 2 months ish...I like it :)


By INeedCache on 1/24/2007 6:29:36 AM , Rating: 2
Too bad you're so easily amused. I don't really think anyone should be bashing anyone. All companies make some good stuff, and some not-so-good stuff. If someone has a legitimate complaint about a company's product, fine. But this juvenile "MICROSUCKS" is beyond being old. It never was funny, and only a complete moron would think it clever. So, I think in this case, the troll label is well-deserved.


"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki