backtop


Print 92 comment(s) - last by DeepBlue1975.. on Nov 20 at 4:03 PM


Apple pokes fun at Microsoft's Vista woes in its latest advertisements... again
Microsoft rolls along with SP1 updates

While Apple is using its latest round of TV commercials to further push the butcher knife into Windows Vista -- specifically, Microsoft's decision to extend the sales of Windows XP and allow users to downgrade Vista to Windows XP -- the boys in Redmond are hard at work on the first service pack for the operating system.

Microsoft released the Service Pack 1 (SP1) beta to a select group of testers in late September. The update cured many of the ailments that afflicted Windows Vista since its retail release on January 30.

"Improvements were also noticeable in resuming from Hibernation or Sleep on both my desktop PC and laptop running SP1," remarked Microsoft's Brandon LeBlanc in September. "I discovered copying files from one directory to another is a bit faster. And on my laptop - battery life seems to be improved since running SP1. I have also noticed that transferring files to my shares on my Windows Home Server are a bit faster than they were previously without SP1. Overall performance in accessing my mapped network shares is improved as well."

Yesterday, Microsoft released a new Release Candidate (RC) build (6001-17042-071107-1618) of SP1 to testers. The latest build weighs in at 434.84MB for the x86 version and 734.3MB for the x64 version.

Testers who already have the previous SP1 beta installed, however, will run into somewhat of a roadblock when it comes to the new RC build.

"Windows Vista SP1 does not support build-to-build upgrades," states Microsoft. "Therefore, if you have installed a previously release build on your machine, you have to uninstall this old build before installing the next build of Windows Vista SP1."

Windows Vista SP1 RC is currently available for download from the Microsoft Connect website for current SP1 testers.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Vista Death Watch Article
By SavagePotato on 11/16/2007 9:59:05 AM , Rating: 2
So explain to me what part of that is the fault of Vista? Someone sells you a computer that you feel is underequipped, and your first thought is to pin the blame on the maker of the OS?

It's not beyond current systems at all, I've used it on plenty of lower end systems, and you simply don't need to be running Vista on a system with 512 megs of ram.

The other day one of our network administrators ordered a new computer for his brother, he got a machine with an 8500gt in it preloaded with Vista and ready to go for $700. Honestly, why is there any reason to go out and spend $499 for an emachine with a single core celeron and 512 megs of ram and then blame vista because you feel the system is slow?

The fact of the matter is, video cards are getting cheap, very cheap. Right now I can spec systems with an x1650 pro on them for a cost of about $60 for the card. Thats it, $60 and you have a rebranded x1800 which blows away an onboard video solution. Is that and maybe $20 more for a 1 gig stick instead of a 512 going to break the bank and scar someone for life?


RE: Vista Death Watch Article
By leexgx on 11/16/2007 10:13:09 AM , Rating: 2
price between 512mb and 1gb, is like less then £5/$10, there is No need to sell pcs with 512mb ram + vista + 64mb shared ram (448mb for OS use) the system will go mega slow when you load up anti virus or load up an program

vista for smooth ish running 1gb ram, 2gb should be what you aim for when getting an pc (and an dual core cpu)

min spec pcs can run XP fine


RE: Vista Death Watch Article
By Chudilo on 11/16/2007 10:21:05 AM , Rating: 2
The part that everyone is blaming Vista for is the fact that both Linux and Mac OS do not have these huge hardware requirements and yet offer more eye candy on a lesser equipped machine.

For example, the big obvious change in Vista is the 3d accelerated window manager. Well Linux with Compiz or Beryl do a better job without being inconvenient. All the extra pretty graphics actually make the system faster (if you have any sort of a 3d accelerator) in other words a now dated NVidia 6800 will get you running leaps and bounds faster then Vista.

Check out some videos on YouTube of "Ubuntu with Beryl" if that can't make you see that there might be something to it after all, then you are blind.

Well obviously there are more changes to vista then just the eye candy. and that the stuff that doesn't work. Linux has always been more secure and stable the Windows by definition. That that's a given. Yes Microsoft decided to push their .net technology into Vista. and that's where they probably got burned. .NET is still pretty immature. There are lots of things still wrong with it. They though they would be ok, but it turned out that they shot themselves in the foot. And that's the reason for all the criticism.


RE: Vista Death Watch Article
By SavagePotato on 11/17/2007 12:00:33 AM , Rating: 2
I've personaly tested beryl to see what it is about, I think it looks cheesy tacky and cheap. Aero on the other hand doesn't blaringly stand out like stupid wiggling jello windows when you drag them around.

Seriously the way people talk you would think a bloody 8800gtx was neccesary for aero. Stop beleiving the fud, it is not that intensive to run at all.

When you show me that OSX and Ubuntu support the same hardware base and application base as Vista, then maybe that statement might have some creedence.

Linux is never ever going to be a mainstream consumer OS despite how much fans want it to happen it simply isn't, ever, end of story, period.


RE: Vista Death Watch Article
By SirKronan on 11/18/2007 7:47:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The part that everyone is blaming Vista for is the fact that both Linux and Mac OS do not have these huge hardware requirements and yet offer more eye candy on a lesser equipped machine.


How can you say that? Maybe Linux demands less for the money, but OSX? I am a big fan of my MacBook, but when I payed $1200 for it and it came with 512mb ram, it's performance for price ratio with Tiger was lackluster, to say the least. If I ran several programs at a time my "pretty" interface would slow down substantially. I've since invested $120 in upgrading it to 2GB of RAM and the performance is a LOT better, for obvious reasons. I've also recently upgraded to Leopard, which still runs nice and fast, after a few timely patches provided by Apple.

Here's my problem with your comment. To get my machine running the interface smoothly, especially multitasking, I had to buy a $1200 machine and upgrade the RAM for another $120. Obviously a notebook is going to be more expensive, but to get comparable performance on a Mac with Tiger or Leopard you're still going to pay around a grand. That's ONE THOUSAND dollars for the most basic Mac with a monitor. Shortly after I bought my Macbook I built a system for a friend for about $1000. It has a nice AMD dual core processor, 2GB ram, 320GB hard drive, inexpensive 7600GT video card, AND a 20" Widescreen monitor. It runs Vista Home Premium just fine with bells and whistles, multitasking, etc. When people come in to buy a desktop with Vista, they want to spend $500 for the whole outfit with a monitor. Then they come back in later and complain that Vista runs slow... Same problem with Vista laptops. Customers want to spend $600 on their laptops. The CHEAPEST Mac laptop starts at over $1000, so the hardware had better be superior to the $500 Vista laptop. People who spend a grand or more on a Vista desktop or even laptop now are going to get 2GB of RAM and the faster processors necessary to run Vista without any hiccups.

Point is, you really get what you pay for. Linux might give you more bells and whistles and customizability for your dollar, but lacks the broad support and peripheral compatibility of Windows. I'm not a "fanboy" of either, I just want to see people making fair comparisons, and yours was not.


RE: Vista Death Watch Article
By Procurion on 11/16/2007 10:45:28 AM , Rating: 1
In a way you are right, but in another you are wrong. The ads that attract most people to buying a new computer don't give information that's necessary. You are right, Vista isn't to blame and I never said that it is all Vistas' fault.

Discreet graphics are an arcane science to 95% of the world. Calling people stupid or idiots because they don't understand or know how to build a computer is a non-starter, and we've seen a lot of that on the boards in posts. People don't need, nor want, to know how to repair an automobile in order to drive it. A pilot does not need to be an A&P mechanic to fly his airplane. And so on...

That is my point. Your response by talking about how your friend ordered a computer for his brother is exactly what I mean. You have to admit that his brother did not know how to set up or order a computer. Whether it is "right" or "wrong" is beside the point.

If you want to spend the rest of your life traveling the world, enlightening people about computers, have at it, lol. The phone calls from my parents and friends are enough for me. In my hour of drive time home I spend most of it solving their current computer-related issues. THAT is my point, do you see? 99% of the consumers don't want to be a geek-they have us! The person goes out and buys a new computer and expects it to work, expects just that. If it doesn't, for whatever reason, work the way they were lead to believe it would, they become upset.

Vista through some inefficiencies and undocumented shortcomings(memory) caused enough moms and pops to bitch. It is a technology issue and consumers don't need or want to be IT specialists to push the power button.


RE: Vista Death Watch Article
By SavagePotato on 11/17/2007 12:11:25 AM , Rating: 1
Back the truck up a few steps there and maybe you can show me the quote where I said people are stupid idiots. I would realy love for you to show me where i used that word.

If you are building your own computer, you better know what you are doing or go home, simple as that. Thats what package systems are for. If you are buying a package system do your homework or ask someone knowledgeable for help, again end of story.

What does it have to do wether the fellow from works brother is computer savy or not? I don't see any relevence whatsoever to that. He ordered his brother an out of the box, non customized completely factory system for $700, and it works fabulously. He doesn't need to be an airplane mechanic as you say either to use it, because yes, guess what Vista is every bit as easy if not easier than Xp to use. Honestly I don't get where this "have to be a rocket scientist" stance comes from.

Casual users have no idea whatsoever what the memory space inneficiency is, the people that do are gamers who have had games crash running out of memory (example stalker). This issue was addressed long ago via hotfix, therefore it is a non issue. The reason people bitch, and trust me I've personaly listened to them bitch, is because they don't want to get around the learning curve of a new OS, and trust me it is as minimal a learning curve there could be.


“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki