backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 53 comment(s) - last by SoCalBoomer.. on May 6 at 1:15 PM

Microsoft was unable to keep up with the demand for its Windows 7 Release Candidate to TechNet and MSDN subscribers. The demand overloaded Microsoft servers, making download unavailable for much of Wednesday.  (Source: BlogsDNA)
Public excitement causes a happy headache for Microsoft

Companies seldom receive the news that their web servers have crashed with much joy, but compared to a crash from poor service or a botnet attack, this type of malfunction is about as happy as they come.  Microsoft's release of the Release Candidate (build 7100) of Windows 7 to MSDN and TechNet subscribers in both 32- and 64-bit forms was slowed by a server crash Wednesday.

Similar to the launch of the beta of Windows 7 in January, the demand was so overwhelming that Microsoft's servers were taken off line as of noon Eastern Time yesterday.  MSDN users were greeted with the message "Sorry, we were unable to service your request," while TechNet subscribers were met with the equally disappointing message, "We're sorry! The page you were expecting to see has been removed or is unavailable."

Microsoft's message boards were stormed by disgruntled and disappointed users.  A user by the name Lyle Pratt wrote on the TechNet forum, "Man, this stinks."

John Butler, a Microsoft partner, comments, "I can't believe we can still bring MSDN to its knees!  Surely, they should be able to deal with this? Not a good advert for Microsoft."

Microsoft urged users to keep trying to reach the page.  They insisted the downloads were available, despite the press and public being generally unable to reach them.  No other reason for the failure was given, other than the implied cause of demand.

While the news is certainly a headache for Microsoft, it isn't all bad.  The news makes great PR for the new OS, which is already being lauded by the press.  DailyTech's reporters have tested and tried the new OS, and we can report that it is indeed shaping up nicely, with a polished, intuitive interface, and greatly improved hardware compatibility versus Vista at launch.  It is good to see that Microsoft is listening to its beta testers, too.  The company, known, like its competitor Apple, for going its own way in the past, has turned over a new leaf, fixing over 2,000 bugs in the new OS pre-release, all based on user feedback.

The fun will start all over again, likely, when Windows 7 RC is released to the general public May 5.  The build is already circulating the torrent community.  Users looking to install should note that the release candidate requires a full reinstall, unlike updates to the beta builds.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
<no subject>
By Scabies on 5/1/2009 1:00:14 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
A user by the name Lyle Pratt wrote on the TechNet forum, "Man, this stinks."


Such an informed statement. Glad we got this on record!




RE: <no subject>
By walk2k on 5/1/2009 1:06:09 PM , Rating: 5
At least he used proper punctuation and spelling.


RE: <no subject>
By SleepyGreg on 5/1/2009 6:19:45 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, up until that point I was completely unable to form any opinion of my own about the situation. Thanks to this insightful quote now I know - it stinks! Thanks Lyle!


RE: <no subject>
By Cincybeck on 5/1/2009 7:48:45 PM , Rating: 3
Not sure if it's what the writer was going for or not, but I thought it was funny... =D


By sapiens74 on 5/1/2009 1:23:48 PM , Rating: 2
Got it installed and works great though.

GJ MS!




By aegisofrime on 5/1/2009 1:55:32 PM , Rating: 2
Does anybody know if you can upgrade from Beta 1 to 7100?


By mikefarinha on 5/1/2009 2:02:03 PM , Rating: 1
Not without doing some manual configuration of the install files. It is outlined on the Engineering Windows 7 blog.


By Dark Legion on 5/2/2009 5:10:12 AM , Rating: 2
Really? Because i already upgraded my laptop twice without doing a full reinstall (build 7000(beta1) to 706X, and then again to build 7100). Just pop in the install CD while Windows is booted, and you can upgrade it and keep all of your files and most of your settings. The same can be done from Vista, assuming you upgrade from x86 vista to x86 Win7, and the same with x64.


By BeastieBoy on 5/1/2009 2:06:16 PM , Rating: 2
The last line of the article reads:

Users looking to install should note that the release candidate requires a full reinstall, unlike updates to the beta builds.


By TomZ on 5/1/2009 2:43:34 PM , Rating: 2
A full install insn't required. It is highly suggested by Microsoft, and they have published a workaround in case you do want to upgrade.


By Justin Time on 5/1/2009 7:11:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'd say it's more strongly recommended than that, but yes, it's doable, and they have a workaround available.

The MS W7 Engineering blog has the details, but as they take pains to point out, most of the "weirdness" they see comes from people upgrading build to build and from using unofficial interim builds.

They don't support upgrading from Beta to RC, so you are on your own if you choose to do it and have a problem, as it's not something they consider as a real-world scenario.

They want to see telemetry from Vista->RC or clean install RC.


By plonk420 on 5/2/2009 12:48:27 AM , Rating: 2
"Extract the .iso contents to a storage location you wish to run the upgrade from (a bootable flash drive
or a directory on any partition on the machine running the old build
Browse to the sources directory
Open the file cversion.ini in a text editor like Notepad
Modify the MinClient build number to a value lower than the down-level build. For example, change 7100 to 7000
Save the file in place with the same name
Run setup.exe like you would normally and the version check will be bypassed"


torrents
By tester3000 on 5/1/2009 12:43:53 PM , Rating: 5
Now imagine what would've happened if the RC hadn't been leaked. MS should embrace bittorrent as a means of distributing there OS.




RE: torrents
By Captain828 on 5/2/2009 2:48:39 PM , Rating: 2
+1

Glad I got it (the x64 one) from a private tracker; took less than an hour. :)


Free for 13 months
By crystal clear on 5/1/2009 11:06:06 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft Corp. will let users run Windows 7 Release Candidate (RC) for more than a year, giving them free use of the new operating system for a significantly longer time than it did Vista's previews.

Windows 7 RC, slated for download by MSDN and TechNet subscribers today and by the general public on May 5, doesn't expire until June 1, 2010, 13 months from tomorrow, Microsoft confirmed today.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?com...

When asked why the company is giving users such a long free pass for the software, a spokeswoman declined to comment.




RE: Free for 13 months
By reader1 on 5/1/09, Rating: -1
RE: Free for 13 months
By DigitalFreak on 5/1/2009 12:37:00 PM , Rating: 1
You haven't off'd yourself yet?


RE: Free for 13 months
By Boze on 5/2/2009 1:46:24 AM , Rating: 1
http://www.linux4windows.com/year_of_the_linux_des...

Don't give up the fight, Fox. Where's Scully to inject the realism when you need her??


RE: Free for 13 months
By crystal clear on 5/1/2009 11:45:03 AM , Rating: 2
Acer has confirmed that Windows 7 will be available pre-loaded on their new all-in-one Z5600 PC from the 23 October 2009, not by the end of January 2010 as Microsoft has been previously suggesting.

Acer also confirmed to us that any Vista-based models purchased in the 30 days prior to this date will be eligible for Microsoft's free upgrade programme.

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/news.phtml/23846/a...


More on what happened
By crystal clear on 5/1/2009 11:33:46 AM , Rating: 5
This morning at 6AM PDT, when Windows 7 Release Candidate downloads were officially made available for MSDN and TechNet subscribers, it looked like a sequel to that botched release. After 20 minutes or so of smooth downloads, both sites began bogging down, and the situation deteriorated rapidly as the minutes passed. For several hours after the official launch, most subscribers who tried to log on found themselves unable to reach the download pages.

This time, though, the problem wasn’t capacity. Instead, a source tells me, the glitch was caused by a SQL Server database that reached excessive fragmentation levels because of the tremendous surge of queries. How massive was the demand surge? The number of requests to the MSDN and TechNet databases in less than an hour was equal to more than a week’s traffic under normal circumstances.

The following graphic is from an internal Microsoft document explaining what happened. The blue line indicates percentage of processor usage, which is directly tied to fragmentation of the SQL Server database:

After the SQL Server index was rebuilt (just after 9:30AM), processor use dropped back to high but acceptable levels. I’m told that Microsoft engineers are now monitoring the status of this database every 30 minutes and plan to rebuild the indexes every evening to avoid a recurrence of the problem.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=910




I guess I was lucky?
By VaultDweller on 5/1/2009 10:55:57 AM , Rating: 2
I downloaded the RC without issues yesterday, along with SP2 for Vista/Server 2008. I never had any problems, though the download speeds were lower than usual for MSDN.




RE: I guess I was lucky?
By VTTony on 5/1/2009 11:07:43 AM , Rating: 2
I finished the download for Win 7 around 10:00AM MDT yesterday, after refreshing the page numerous times. It took a while, but the page eventually came up.


Import detail left out...
By Jeff7181 on 5/1/2009 3:08:48 PM , Rating: 4
The release candidate is NOT available to TechNet subscribers. It IS available to TechNet PLUS subscribers.




By dastruch on 5/1/2009 3:14:20 PM , Rating: 2
"...fixing over 2,000 bugs in the new OS pre-release, all based on user feedback."

They fixed 2000 some months ago. Are we going to read about those every time a new release is out?

It's good if there is not much left to fix but...




upgrading from interim builds
By Randomblame on 5/1/2009 11:45:27 PM , Rating: 2
I tested upgrading from build 7077 to this release 7100, it works. A clean install is always better though. 7077 is nearly the same as 7100 in that you will not see changes but rest assured they are there. 7100 was made from build 7088 which was not leaked.

I have it running on my new i7 rig, it's incredibly stable and very fast. I'm not sure if I prefer it to vista though. Its caching seems to be a lot less aggressive than vista, which means my 6 gigs of ddr3 is going to waste.




Virtualization
By Lord 666 on 5/1/09, Rating: -1
RE: Virtualization
By quiksilvr on 5/1/2009 10:53:11 AM , Rating: 2
They were probably expecting a slightly higher demand the last time around and prepared for that. They weren't prepared for such a huge response. It happens. They didn't "flub" anything.


RE: Virtualization
By Lord 666 on 5/1/09, Rating: -1
RE: Virtualization
By jonmcc33 on 5/1/2009 11:17:24 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, the same number of IT people downloading on TechNET/MSDN are about the same number of IT people downloading the public release. You don't really think that the average Joe actually installs an operating system do you? 95% will be IT professionals downloading for testing purposes whether at work or home. The remaining 5% will be those tweakers or gamers that think they have a clue. 0% of the normal PC user will even realize that it's out or how to even install it.


RE: Virtualization
By Lord 666 on 5/1/09, Rating: -1
RE: Virtualization
By DigitalFreak on 5/1/2009 12:38:29 PM , Rating: 2
Why should we trust you? You obviously don't have many friends.


RE: Virtualization
By Xenoterranos on 5/2/2009 1:34:22 AM , Rating: 1
I don't like how you capitalized trust. Just saying, makes it look slimy.


RE: Virtualization
By SavagePotato on 5/3/2009 11:44:48 AM , Rating: 1
A techy bartender / actor type, say you aren't from the Vancouver area are you?


RE: Virtualization
By RamarC on 5/1/2009 11:40:08 AM , Rating: 1
like the beta, the rc is free! why would anyone devote extra resources for a free download?

msdn/technet servers are designed to accomodate their typical load, not an extraordinary load. next week things will be fine.

and virtualization will not increase the pipe bandwidth. if the pipe is full, only a fatter pipe will increase download capacity.


RE: Virtualization
By wavetrex on 5/1/2009 12:06:57 PM , Rating: 5
Microsoft should learn to use torrents.

They work for Linux distribution very well, why shouldn't they work for Windows downloads ?

Bandwidth and server load problems "magically" dissapear.


RE: Virtualization
By omnicronx on 5/1/2009 12:35:04 PM , Rating: 3
Torrents really cannot be used as a distrobution method in this case. In this case people have an MSDN subscription and want the download right away. With torrents you need people to seed the download originally. Considering how many people are trying to download this at once, MS could potentially use just as much resources while initially seeding the file, not to mention it would probably take longer for people to download initially too.

Torrents are great, but they have no place in this kind of environment.


RE: Virtualization
By kaoken on 5/2/2009 5:28:46 AM , Rating: 2
Obviously you dont understand how torents work.


RE: Virtualization
By crystal clear on 5/2/2009 10:06:03 AM , Rating: 3
Just a warning for anyone downloading the new RC builds of windows 7. Quiet a lot of the downloads have a trojan inbedded in the setup EXE.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=76...


RE: Virtualization
By SoCalBoomer on 5/6/2009 1:15:55 PM , Rating: 2
That's the LEAKED version - look at the post dates. . .April.

That's one reason why, for something like this, I prefer going straight to Microsoft (or Apple or Sun or whomever) - the official version is clean. Getting it from an unauthorized source. . .

That being said, yes I know that official torrents do have MD5 - and those are official torrents and I'm all for those.

NOT for the unofficial leaked ones. :D


RE: Virtualization
By Murst on 5/1/2009 12:42:52 PM , Rating: 3
Considering that I generally download at my max speed when getting a file from MS, I would prefer them to stay away from bittorrent.

BT is great for when you don't have enough bandwidth by yourself. and MS doesn't fall into that category. A switch to BT would only slow things down.

Also, the majority of files that MS provides are rather small in size ( under 5 megs ). BT, in best case scenratios, takes several seconds to ramp up to full speed. During those several seconds, the file I'm getting is generally already downloaded.


RE: Virtualization
By Murst on 5/1/2009 12:47:29 PM , Rating: 2
BTW, imagine if MS had to explain to everyone how to open up their ports so that BT could work correctly. For most corporate environments, it would mean that people cannot even download a file from MS.


RE: Virtualization
By Captain828 on 5/2/2009 2:51:27 PM , Rating: 2
Corporate environments and Beta OSes don't quite mix...


RE: Virtualization
By Murst on 5/4/2009 1:04:07 AM , Rating: 3
So, you think MS released the beta to their corporate partners first just for kicks?

Corporations, especially ISVs who develop for the windows platform are the ones who actually NEED to get the beta to verify that everything runs smoothly.


RE: Virtualization
By walk2k on 5/1/2009 1:07:59 PM , Rating: 2
While virii and spyware "magically" take their place.


RE: Virtualization
By zyren on 5/1/2009 5:44:42 PM , Rating: 2
You guys are missing the point about torrents. Who said anything about using torrents as the sole distribution of files. Like Ubuntu and other linux operating systems, have servers for people who want to download directly, and also have torrents for people who want that option. For people who know what they are doing with torrents, and are willing to seed, torrents are usually a much better and economical way of distribution, and is a win-win situation for both the user and the company. If you don't feel like using it and want to download directly, its your choice, but its a very wise move to have both options.


So it's true...
By reader1 on 5/1/09, Rating: -1
RE: So it's true...
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/1/2009 10:53:46 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Internet users face regular “brownouts” that will freeze their computers as capacity runs out in cyberspace, according to research to be published later this year.


That's overly vague. Further, that's referring to publicly hosted sites -- Microsoft does its own hosting and thus has complete control over service continuity.

quote:

Experts predict that consumer demand, already growing at 60 per cent a year, will start to exceed supply from as early as next year because of more people working online and the soaring popularity of bandwidth-hungry websites such as YouTube and services such as the BBC’s iPlayer.


It's just growing pains... All you have to do to add bandwidth is to add more network infrastructure and servers. Its simple supply and demand. If demand is high enough, prices will rise, and the increase revenue, in turn will yield appropriate increases in supply.

People just need to realize the internet is just like any other business and isn't voodo magic.

quote:
It will initially lead to computers being disrupted and going offline for several minutes at a time. From 2012, however, PCs and laptops are likely to operate at a much reduced speed, rendering the internet an “unreliable toy”.


This is where the article really takes a turn deep into the realm of alarmist FUD...

In my opinion, that article is vague, uninformed tripe. We're not on the verge of some huge cyberdisaster. Rather, companies just need to make sure not to get ahead of themselves when it comes to revenue v. service. We might see a bit of a Web 2.0 burst, just like the dot com burst several years back. But to the users, they will still have plent of services.

quote:
It's a trivial problem to solve.


This made me laugh. You list this dire doomsday prediction article about the internet which offers no solution and then you say the solution (to this imaginary problem) is simple to fix? Well first the problem isn't there in the first place... Second if it was, how would the fix be "simple"??


RE: So it's true...
By Jeff7181 on 5/1/2009 3:13:04 PM , Rating: 3
Exactly. "The Internet" is incredibly fault tolerant, redundant and scalable.

Need more bandwidth? Add more pipes.
Need more processing or storage capacity? Add more servers.
Run out of room for more servers and more pipes? Upgrade to new servers and new pipes or build another site.

The only problem is the cost. Technologically there is no barrier preventing everyone from having 1 Gbit connections to their home.


RE: So it's true...
By DigitalFreak on 5/1/2009 12:35:22 PM , Rating: 4
FUD


RE: So it's true...
By themaster08 on 5/1/2009 2:56:23 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
It's a trivial problem to solve.

Then why don't you start by not wasting capacity with your ridiculous comments.


RE: So it's true...
By Akrovah on 5/1/2009 6:11:05 PM , Rating: 2
I especially like how they equate internet speed with PC speed.


RE: So it's true...
By Doormat on 5/2/2009 1:30:38 AM , Rating: 1
I'm sick of hearing about this "exaflood" BS. Ars had a couple of good articles about the so-called problem, guess what, its not an issue. Transport speeds will continue to improve, there is still a lot of dark fiber.


And in related news...
By mkruer on 5/1/09, Rating: -1
We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki