Microsoft Responds About Windows Vista Sp1

[HellasVagabond]

Microsoft today made an official announcement regarding the upcoming Windows Vista Sp1. Main reason was a typo mistake in a email send out by the Windows Driver Kit team who stated that their beta software version would be released the same time as the Windows Vista Sp1 Beta.

There will be a Windows Vista service pack and our current expectation is that a beta will be made available sometime this year. Service packs are part of the traditional software lifecycle — they’re something we do for all Microsoft products as part of our commitment to continuous improvement, and providing early test builds is a standard practice that helps us incorporate customer feedback and improve the overall quality of the product. Service packs are just one example of the work we do to constantly improve the Windows experience. We also deliver improvements to Windows via Windows Update, which is an excellent channel for providing our customers with the most significant updates as they happen. And, since Windows Vista launched, we have continued working with partners to improve overall device coverage and application compatibility. There are now more than 2.1 million supported devices and more than 2,000 logoed applications for Windows Vista. We think customers will have a great experience using Windows Vista today.

Source: NetworkWorld (http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/17662)

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

bah ...

[Kreij]

I am not sure why a service pack for Vista is even news. Everyone who has ever used a MS product knows there will be service packs and updates.

I am happy with Vista. Works fine on my system.

[HellasVagabond]

Well an Service pack aint news...The WHEN its gonna get released is :)

[Kreij]

Well an Service pack aint news...The WHEN its gonna get released is :)

I suppose you right. I guess that I am so used to working around any bugs that affect what I do that I take it all for granted.

The interesting thing is that other than disabling the goofy UAC and driver sign checks in Vista, I have not had to work around anything. It never crashes on me and the installation was easier than XP ever was for me (and as an IT person I have loaded XP a jillion times on machines). I did not have to use seperate disk to install RAID (F6 thingie) which amazed me. Networking has been painless and even my new NAS was a breeze to install and Vista has no problems with it.

Just my observations....

[russianboy]

More device coverage....

isn't vista bloated enough without the drivers?

My father had this idea, m$ checks/detects your hardware, goes on its site, and downloads them for you!

That way, you have the drivers you need and not the 2gb of drivers your never gonna use!

[15th Warlock]

More device coverage....

isn't vista bloated enough without the drivers?

My father had this idea, m$ checks/detects your hardware, goes on its site, and downloads them for you!

That way, you have the drivers you need and not the 2gb of drivers your never gonna use!

But how would you be able to connect to the internet to download the needed drivers if you don't have generic drivers for your NIC card in the first place? Or generic display drivers for your video card and monitor so you can see what your downloading... :p

The list goes on and on... Unfortunately, with the variety of system configurations in the PC market, MS has to aim for the lowest common denominator set of drivers, hence the 2+ GBs of unneeded drivers after installation :(

[DaMulta]

95 > 98> 98SE>ME>2000>XP>Vista

Looks like windows 95 is the best because it's less bloated and uses way less memory than the other windows out there.

[russianboy]

I know your system doesn't NEED to have drivers, and I think you can run your moniter @ 640x480 while it downloads them for you.

Perhaps the only drivers it has are for networking.

My father sez that in the win95 era, cds & floppies came w/ every device, even mouse! & you would install drivers from that instead of using M$'s, perhaps if we don't want ANY drivers we can go that route, or setup/install windows, put in the networking/motherboard CD in, and you will have your networking drivers and then you download the drivers off of M$s site, this STILL saving you 2 gb.

I'm going to M$ about this idea.

The problem w/ 95 @ the time, little usb support.

Now ATi drivers have more code than 95 did! (appx 40 mb)

[devguy]

95 > 98> 98SE>ME>2000>XP>Vista

Looks like windows 95 is the best because it's less bloated and uses way less memory than the other windows out there.

I disagree with that! 98SE is way better than ME :)

Oh, and just try using your two gigs in Windows 95 and see what happens. I know my motherboard's manual clearly states that it cannot be used in Windows 9x (weird, huh?).

And RussianBoy, the reason Microsoft does the many drivers deal is that it is very easy on the end users. Not all PC owners have the knowledge or patience for that. Besides, I think the end goal is better Plug and Play. As opposed to getting that damn "Windows has found new Hardware" screen wha-tu-do?.

[HellasVagabond]

True but in windows 95 we didnt have support for graphics or audio like we do in xp and vista....Not to mention that windows 95 were filled with security holes.

[russianboy]

Well I like my idea

I'm feeling constructive.

[DaMulta]

When I'm at work and I install soomething and windows say's found hardware...installing hardware...hardware ready to use. It makes me a little happy inside because I didn't have to do a damn thing.

And who cares if windows vista is 10-20 gigs? You can get a 500 gig hard drive for 100 USD 500 GIGS!!!!!!!

[devguy]

When in doubt, VLite is the answer!!!

[15th Warlock]

I know your system doesn't NEED to have drivers, and I think you can run your moniter @ 640x480 while it downloads them for you.

Perhaps the only drivers it has are for networking.

My father sez that in the win95 era, cds & floppies came w/ every device, even mouse! & you would install drivers from that instead of using M$'s, perhaps if we don't want ANY drivers we can go that route, or setup/install windows, put in the networking/motherboard CD in, and you will have your networking drivers and then you download the drivers off of M$s site, this STILL saving you 2 gb.

I'm going to M$ about this idea.

The problem w/ 95 @ the time, little usb support.

Now ATi drivers have more code than 95 did! (appx 40 mb)

It sure sounds like a good idea, but I just gave you two examples... what about RAID controller drivers, SATA drivers, USB Mouse and Keyboard drivers? CD/DVD drivers? Chipset drivers... ad nauseam....

Would you like to have to install drivers from different disks every time you install windows? That'll take 30 mins, and that's even without starting the OS installation :p

And what if you lost your keyboard driver disc, or your motherboard driver disc? Having to keep track of disks for each piece of hardware would be a pain in the ass :D

I prefer having to waste 2 GBs, as DaMulta said, with bigger HDDs getting cheaper by the hour, what's a meager 2 GBs to save you so much hassle? :)

[russianboy]

Perhaps it has drivers for the devices you listed.
Surly you have your motherboard drivers! That should cover the networking, etc.

[Kreij]

RB, your idea has merit but there is also the issue that not everyone has broadband. I would not care to DL Ati CCC from my home connection (40MB would take me hours and then would probably fail), and that is only one driver.

Also, you do need drivers. For Windows to even install it need to load a subset of generic drivers so it can use the peripherals it needs to install itself.

If Windows installed a generic set and then I had to find a BB connection to DL the latest drivers and make a CD (or whatever) to take home before I could even really use the computer, it would be rather irritating.

I too agree that 2GB of drivers is no big deal, and is worth it for the convenience.

[WarEagleAU]

Its all about the money. ::nods::



I was hoping for a service pack release this year. Ive yet to partition my hdd off and make a spot for vista. Id imagine 15 to 20gb partition should be enough though.