“Which build of Vista SP1 became the release to manufacturing edition? This was definitely a topic of high speculation in the last few weeks, even before SP1 hit the RTM milestone. Many were adamant that SP1 RTM was, or would be, different from the final release candidate, while those on the other side grasped at straws to prove their suspicions. The Microsoft Watcher, also known as Mary Jo Foley, has finally received confirmation from Microsoft that the Vista SP1 RTM build (6001-18000) is none other than Vista SP1 RC Refresh 2.”
Is this not the point of an RC, its finally good enough to become final ? Or am i missiing something here ?
Yeah, it is. I’m not sure why this is news.
This discrepency came up.. on my vista ultimate 64bit
Refresh 2 is kernel version:
6001.17128.amd64fre.longhorn.080101-1935
and the RTM is:
6001.18000.amd64fre.longhorn
Big difference
Hmm, this seems not to be what the article reports … If what you say is the case then refresh 2 is not final …
sounds like they lost interest with Vista SP , there interest seems to be yahoo atm
Installed the RTM, took about an hour with about 5-6 reboots. The only problem I have really noticed is that IUSR (the IIS process) lost rights to Windows/Temp. Not an issue for most users, but not only would my asp pages not compile, but it was telling me that the problem was the ASP.net temporary folder. After about half an hour of pulling out my hair, I broke out filemon and found out what the problem was in short order.
I haven’t really noticed any improvements (other then some really nice stuff added to the IIS7 admin panel), although I have never really had any problems with Vista.
Edited 2008-02-09 07:28 UTC
Mary is not really the most accurate of journalists. And you can tell when she did her write up on the Apple WWDC conference last year, that she struggles to understand some fundamental concepts (she actually said Core animation was just a program, which had she done her research, is so off, and everything she said was wrong).
I bet her confirmation is going onto bittorrent, and seeing someone has posted a RTM build. But I’ve looked, and I haven’t seen a RTM yet released anywhere, on any torrent. You can tell that even the file name is marked as January (but people tend to miss the obvious), and will argue for ages, and people will argue that it needs to be a certain filename, which is incorrect also.
I don’t consider anything Foley says anymore as confirmation. And even after hundreds of responses against her dodgy Macworld post, she still obviously had no idea what she was talking about. She started making all those comparisons that made no sense. Despite inadequancies in her article being said in clear words to her, she corrected them with another wrong statement.
Take this with a grain of salt for now I’d say, until somebody else has confirmed this.
I’d be surprised in fact, if Foley was even part of the beta program. Either way, even if the only difference between the final beta was the version number, it doesn’t matter, because I’d imagine that Windows update most likely will use the version number to identify updates later on, so (I could be wrong), but things could get a bit dodgy with updates later, or you may need to install the whole RTM anyway later on, to fix just the version.
I don’t trust this lady enough to upgrade any of my computers based on her words, because she could be wrong.
And yes Mary, if you are listening, I think you lost half your crowd when you failed to correct your WWDC post, so maybe if you revised it to prove that you do know fundamental computer science concepts, you’d get a lot more readers back.