Comments on: Office, Vista getting new service packs

The Office 2007 update will come early next year, while Microsoft won't say when Vista SP2 is coming, though it appears nearly ready for outside testers.

[Mr. Dee]

This definitely is a yawn. But, it will be interesting to see how huge these two turn out to be. I noticed that Microsoft has changed their policies on Service Packs. After NT 4 SP3, Jim Allchin said from then on, SPs were only for fixes. I read the definition of Service Packs in Vista's Help and Support and I was surprised to know that its also for fixes and 'features' again. With Office 2007 SP1 at 200 MBs, I wonder what SP2 will be, 400 MBs? Microsoft needs to make the next release of Office and Windows reliable enough that servicing won't require these huge post RTM updates. Post Vista SP1 already and Windows Update is like New York City on a Monday morning.

[Lerianis]

Uh, Mr. Dee: the reason that the Office 2007 SP1 pack is so dang big is because it has ALL the fixes that Microsoft has released in it. So I can't really get on the size of the update when I take that into account.
Also, as to make them 'reliable enough'.... no. Even OSX has HUGE, HUGE updates...... you just cannot totally get rid of security flaws (especially ones YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT) before the thing is released.
That said, I was happy with Vista RTM before SP1. I had absolutely NO problems with it whatsoever, outside of Microsoft Office 2007 wanting to bork up every now and again, which I finally figured out was because TweakNow Registry Cleaner was deleting some necessary files.

[jandler]

You snooze, you lose

[Dalkorian]

by Lerianis October 22, 2008 11:42 PM PDT
That said, I was happy with Vista RTM before SP1. I had absolutely NO problems with it whatsoever, outside of Microsoft Office 2007 wanting to bork up every now and again, which I finally figured out was because TweakNow Registry Cleaner was deleting some necessary files.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, I just have to laugh every time I hear an M$ apologist tell a story like that. No problems whatsoever, except borked programs caused by trying to clean up the disaster area M$ calls a "registry".

What would it take to get an M$ apologist like that to hear themselves?

That said, I have to agree with Lerianis on one point - software is written by people who are never perfect, therefore patching is a fact of life for all software, including OS's. No patch will fix what I hate most about fista (DRM slavery), but maybe they can get to a point where the apologists can stop lying about the experience.

[Orion Blastar]

If Vista SP2 is anything like XP SP2, it should fix most of the issues and be more stable.

Here is to hoping that Microsoft gets it right this time. If it does, I might switch back to Vista from XP. I am still considering other alternative operating systems as well, as they have potential once they get out of beta test or get more driver and third party application support.

[ckurowic]

You think XP is mostly devoid of problem? um, where have you been? Do you know of "patch tuesday"?

[jandler]

I also know that apple, oracle, linux distro vendor, firefox, etc all release patches on regular basis.

[Mr. Dee]

Even in a Vista SP1 world, performance is still an issue. Why is this OS so slow on decent hardware? Is it the load of generic drivers that come with the OS, the graphics? Has something gone wrong in the kernel to make Windows take a step back? I am running (well was, because my computer can't even boot now), Windows Vista Enterprise 64 bit SP1 on a AMD Sempron 1.6 GHz, 512 MBs of RAM, Geforce FX 128 MB AGP. Yeah, its old and not enough RAM. But come on, I am only using it for the basics, Firefox and Windows Live Messenger. Yesterday after signing into WLM 8.5, the system just hung. I did a cold boot, started up back but it would not boot up. I did another cold boot, booted into XP Professional and it showed up just fine. This morning now when I attempted to boot, it would not go past POST. The floppy drive light came on then a series of beep codes. Vista, I have defended you, but after this fiasco of a experience I am going to start changing my tune. I have been on XP SP3 for 2 weeks now on my other PC, using my cell modem and I am doing all the things I want to do without all this molasses of an experience. Even opening Word 2007 on Vista is like living in Limbo.

[Lerianis]

This OS is not slow on decent hardware. And guess what? That hardware that you are stating there is NOT decent hardware anymore. It is bottom of the barrel hardware now. That is the reason why you are having problems. For Windows Vista, you want a dual core CPU, 2GB's of RAM, a graphics card released in the past 5 years, and a motherboard released in the past 5 years.

It's as I have said many times before: most people who are having 'problems' with Vista are running it on CRAPPY HARDWARE.

[Mark_Anderson]

"Why is this OS so slow on decent hardware?"

Simple answer? It isn't.

An AMD Sempron FFS!

[jandler]

First you say that "Why is this OS so slow on decent hardware? " But a bit later, you acknowledge that "Yeah, its old and not enough RAM". Then you say are using "Windows Vista Enterprise 64 bit SP1 on a AMD Sempron 1.6 GHz, 512 MBs of RAM, Geforce FX 128 MB AGP"... I'm not even going to ask where you got a Enterprise 64 bit when you are clearly a normal consumer and not an IT guy. Then you compare how Vista suck compared to an "XP SP3 .. on my other PC". "Other", if you want to compare, you have to put it on the same. What you are doing is really stupid. You are basically doing, let's compare Firefox vs Chrome vs IE8. Ok, let's run firefox on a core 2 duo, let's run chrome on a pentium D, let's run IE8 on a pii and do some analysis. Also, you probably have BIOS issue with that Sempron. You said you booted into XP Pro fine on that Visa machine to 'prove' that it's fine. Then I ask you why aren't you using it? why are you using your other pc.

[markedman0965]

Mr. Dee,

If you think that is decent hardware then you need to think again. The biggest impediment for you is the RAM. 2GB for Vista is the minimum you should have. It never ceases to amaze me how many people will put up with slow PC's so they don't have to pay for an upgrade. My boss is so cheap that he still uses dial up because he doesn't want to pay for cable. He makes 6 figures and drives me crazy asking why it is so slow. Duh...

[Imalittleteapot]

Yeah that comp just won't hack it. That computer doesn't even meet the minimum sys requirements for Vista. Only Home Basic has a minimum ram requirement of 512 meg. All the other versions of Vista say 1 gig at least. I say at least 2 gig. But I've been seeing ads for computers right under 1,000 with 6 to 8 gigs of ram with three or four cores in my area. It's just time to get a new box if you want to run Vista. If you don't want a new box just stick with XP or Linux.

[Dalkorian]

Check out the apologists come to fista's defense. Mr. Dee, check out Linux. Ubuntu specifically allows you to burn the OS on a CD and try it out without having to install anything. If you like what you see (a computer that runs), you can set aside a small partition to install it and keep winblows where it is. Mind you I doubt you ever boot winblows again, but it can stay just in case - or as a reminder.

The biggest reason fista is such a hardware hog is the DRM crapware they foisted upon you. M$ can kill off just about anything they want on their machine (what, you thought it was your computer? LOL), including files, programs and hardware including the hard drive partition itself. That's right - they can completely lock you out of their machine, denying access to all files within. They can do it whenever they don't like what you're doing with their computer, or they can do it arbitrarily with a bug introduced in a "patch". It's not a new thing, they've done it before. Google "wga glitch" and remember they're still lying about it, I was totally locked out of my box for 3 days because of that little mistake of theirs. It is the event that got Ubuntu installed on that computer (even THAT wouldn't allow file system access, I had to call them and get a new access code to unlock MY files) and is the reason I will NEVER AGAIN give M$ one dime of my money. Ex-pee was the last M$ mistake I'll ever make, fista apologists can go fista themselves.

[Imalittleteapot]

Dalkorian: Locked out of your box for three days? This is why you should keep a backup of your files and various Windows and Linux disks sitting around. That you won't be locked out. Vista not working for you? Install Linux in a few minutes and copy your files over. Linux not working for you? Get your XP disk. XP not working for you? Use your Vista disk, but whatever you do keep multiple backup of your files and nobody can you lock you out of them.

[wolivere]

"This morning now when I attempted to boot, it would not go past POST. The floppy drive light came on then a series of beep codes."

Your hardware is shot. If you can't get past a post and Bios Beeps it has nothing to do with your OS. You are not even getting to the point of loading an OS. Your reboots may be getting lucky and hitting an OS from time to time.

You need to listen to those beeps and check with the BIOS manufacturer to find out what the error is. Could be bad ram, a bad CPU, video card anything.

But this has 0 to do with the OS

[Renegade Knight]

SP2 won't help. 7 won't help. One of the core problems is the DRM built into Vista which forces drivers to be more than just a driver. For those who are on the anti kill switch wagon, the DRM in Vista allows MicroSoft to pull the plug on 'errant' software/drivers. In otherwords a kill switch.

I was unable to upgrade to Vista on a Vista capable computer (Thinkpad T42p,) because MS can't even provide drivers that work itself.

I like the Vista interface, but I like things that "just work" more.

[AdamMoore]

Microsoft doesn't write the drivers for Thinkpad's hardware. My VIsta machine has never had a single issue since I bought it over a year ago.

[Mark_Anderson]

I love those DRM posts.

Go and give me a relevant example of how Vitsa's use of DRM has caused you an issue please?

Hint: Don't mention NBC because, you know, that was them, not MS.

[outpostprime]

wth you talking about??? I've been running vista x64 home premium for months now. Haven't had a single issue with the OS. Drivers under vista are DRIVERS! That laptop is crap btw. It in no way is capable of vista... Because it is a laptop, I'm 100% sure it uses IBM proprietary drivers. Microsoft DOES NOT MAKE DRIVERS, THE MANUFACTURERS DO! Everybody knows you can't install a new OS on a laptop without making sure the manufacturer supports it.
The only OS's with DRM built into the drivers is MAC OS. Apple does it for QA and charges manufacturers insane amounts. That is the main reason why not many manufacturers make products for the Macintosh platform.

[moondida]

hey buddy ummmmm. I had P4 @1.8G 512MB bus ram
i try to see what will happen to the PC. and geuss what!!!!
do you want to know what happen, there were at least 30 driver issues!!!!
meaning you old hardware (mother board CPU and when it happens to be AMD? (which is ever stable at that time and now!!!) just can;t handle it. Of course !!!
XP is the stable OS after windows 2000 and they NOT are made to be faster than Visa.DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY SOFTWARE PRGRAMER AND OTHER 3RD PARTY COMPANIES WORK ON THIS OS? AT LEAST THOUSANDS. IF YOU DON'T KNOW DON'T SAY A THING ABOUT, THOSE PROGRAMER PUT THOUSAND AND THOUSANDS OF HOURS, AND DO YOU KNOW HOW BIG IS BLUE PRINT OF A CPU IS? A SIZE FOOTBALL FIELD!!!. DO YOU HOW HARD IT IS TO MAKE INSTRUCTION-PROGRAM WISE- FOR CPU TO FUNCTION RIGHT ?
YOU DON'T!!! YOYR HARDWARE IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO TAKE VISTA,
VISTA IS JUST TOOOOOOO HEAVY FOR YOR PC GET IT? BUY A NEW PC.
THAT PC SOUNDS LIKE 7 YEASR OLD.