In late October, Microsoft announced the beta of the second service pack for Windows Vista and Server 2008. This beta was limited in audience, and today Microsoft has fixed that: it opened up the beta for MSDN and TechNet subscribers, and coming Thursday, it will be opened to the general public. The releases will be distributed via TechNet.
Vista’s and Server 2008’s second service pack will be similar to the first in that it doesn’t contain any major new features. It will include all previous updates (as usual), while also containing support for new hardware, as well as support for new standards and technologies. It also delivers improvements made based on data collected through Microsoft’s voluntary Customer Experience Improvement Program. A short summary of the more important changes:
- Windows Vista SP2 adds Windows Search 4.0 for faster and improved relevancy in searches.
- Windows Vista SP2 contains the Bluetooth 2.1 Feature Pack supporting the most recent specification for Bluetooth Technology.
- Ability to record data on to Blu-Ray media natively in Windows Vista.
- Adds Windows Connect Now (WCN) to simplify Wi-Fi Configuration.
- Windows Vista SP2 enables the exFAT file system to support UTC timestamps, which allows correct file synchronization across time zones.
The new service pack is planned to go gold somewhere next year, at least before Windows 7. It comes in a single package that works on both Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008.
New hardware support is good, but I’d really like to see them to something really serious on the performance side. If they can say that Windows 7 will be faster than Vista then why cannot they put these improvements into Vista?
These service packs don’t really seem that thrilling to me. I’ll still stick with XP for the time being unless there’s some significant performance improvements.
If Microsoft fix Vista, then why would you buy Windows 7?
Gee, I don’t know. Perhaps by adding some of the features that Vista missed out on?
Sorry, but that doesn’t address the question I put.
Here … I’ll ask it again … “If Microsoft fix Vista, then why would you buy Windows 7?”
You actually gave me a reason for buying Windows 7 if Microsoft DON’T fix Vista.
… assuming of course that Windows 7 is any good. By all reports it is merely a polished-up version of Vista. It will still be written to satisfy the best interests of Microsoft and business partners, rather than the best interests of the end users who are expected to actually pay for it.
Edited 2008-12-03 03:39 UTC
Huh? Give you a reason to buy Windows 7 and then when I do you say no I didn’t, yet tell me I did?
Sorry, you make no sense.
I asked why anyone would buy Windows 7 if Microsoft fixed Vista (say via a service pack).
You replied with your reason to buy Windows 7 if Microsoft hadn’t fixed Vista. To quote you “Perhaps by adding some of the features that Vista missed out on?” See? If Vista is still missing features that it should have had, then Microsoft haven’t fixed it yet.
So you didn’t answer the question I put.
Edited 2008-12-03 04:47 UTC
hush the both of you. the fact is microsoft IS doing some preformance tuning in SP2. http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1745
now as for why you would by windows 7 even if they fixed up vista’s speed issue and resource issue is simple. new features, changes to the way it handles SSD’s, interface, better 64 bit support, etc…
and, as someone who has been testing both windows 7 and vista sp2 i can tell you that even in beta form sp2 installed vista feel snappier than before. and windows 7, well, it just rocks, people are not going ot be disapointed. well MS haters will be, since they will have one less thing to hate about
Well, I think people don’t hate MS because Vista sucks (which it does actually). People hate MS because of MS’ business conduct and ethics (or lack of).
I dont hate MS, I hate their substandard products. While MS certainly ain’t no altar boy in terms of ethics there are many, many companies with worse ethics (it’s not like MS negligence caused a gigantic chemical leak that killed 15000 of people or anything) so it’s almost lame to hate them for that.
I dislike Microsoft because I don’t care for their products, and because as a 700lb gorilla, and unlike other software companies, things that they do which are of questionable intent or ethics cause massive headaches for those who don’t care to do things the One Microsoft Way. If Corel decided that they wanted to create their own nonstandard Java called Corel-Java, I would simply see it as a folly. But even today, in 2008, I still have to deal with certain sites which my clients need in their business which *require* MS-Java.
Edited 2008-12-03 17:43 UTC
You don’t get it. I was referring to Microsoft adding the performance enhancements to Vista that are in Windows 7 (since there seem to be some) and the incentive to buy Windows 7 would be other features which were missed out on in Vista.
So yeah, I did answer your question, thanks.
Oh, I do get it, let me assure you.
Here is what you were asking: “If they can say that Windows 7 will be faster than Vista then why cannot they put these improvements into Vista?”
I illustrated to you the precise reason why Microsoft cannot put these improvements into Vista, by asking you a question right back, to whit: “If Microsoft fix Vista, then why would you buy Windows 7?”
That went miles over your head, apparently.
You tried to respond by stating a reason why you might buy Windows 7 if Microsoft did NOT put these improvements into Vista.
Precisely my point.
BTW, a good quote recently from someone was along the lines of “Vista is a DRM platform dressed up as an OS”. This BTW is another reason why Vista can’t really be improved … since Vista actually goes out of its way and spends a fair percentage of your CPU resource trying to stop you from doing things with your own machine. If Vista is not doing that, it is spending time (and your electricity and bandwidth, BTW) trying to continuously check if it should close shop on you and go all black because you changed a hard disk or connected a different monitor or something.
The main problems then with Vista is not so much what they left out, but rather what they put in and are refusing to take back out again.
BTW … the solution Microsoft seems to be offering in Windows 7 is to remove a few useless applets from the default OS install!
http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/Windows_7_to_Dump_E-Mail__Photo_Editi…
It would be laughable if it weren’t so pathetic.
Edited 2008-12-03 10:32 UTC
No, you’ve completely misunderstood what I said.
For the last time…
I asked why if they can put improvements into Windows 7 for performance then why not put them into Vista? You asked why buy Windows 7 then, to which I replied that other new features could justify it.
I don’t see anything wrong or confusing about this.
Why don’t you let people tell you what they meant rather than you try to tell them what they meant…
You’re free to have the last say, as I am done with this stupid and pointless thread.
Other features that should have been in Vista is what you actually claimed. Not new … just didn’t make it into Vista.
Quote again: “Perhaps by adding some of the features that Vista missed out on?”
Ergo … perhaps by fixing Vista’s omissions.
BTW, I pointed out that what they were actually offering for Windows 7 was: (1) the same core as Vista (and hence the same you-can’t-do-that–performance-dog DRM platform), and (2) to remove some applets from the default install.
Ref for (1):
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article50…
“Microsoft said that it had not turned its back on Vista, insisting that Windows 7 was a natural development of its software that was based on Vista’s ‘core archeticture.’ ”
Ref for (2):
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10048142-56.html
“Microsoft has decided that Windows 7 won’t include built-in programs for e-mail, photo editing, and movie making, as was done with Windows Vista, CNET News.com has learned. ”
Sorry to disappoint you, but I don’t see any promise of Microsoft adding anything one would actually want, nor removing the anti-user stuff in Vista that one doesn’t want.
They are going to keep the same performance-dog core architecture, with DRM and WGA and all other performance-chewing nasties such as that, and they are going to remove … some of the applets that shipped with Vista.
And then they are apparently expecting people to actually pay them for that. Can you believe it?
Just great and dandy, innit?
Edited 2008-12-03 11:39 UTC
And your proof for this is where, exactly? DRM in the “core”?
So for years we have FOSS/Linux nuts like you claiming hell and beyond because Microsoft included applications with Windows (monopoly abuse! Monopoly abuse!) and now that they remove them… It’s wrong again?
Ah, the typical character trait of a zealous troll: hypocrisy.
lemur2, you’re here for the entertainment value. Nobody takes you seriously.
Strawman. None of what you claim is what I said.
Ad hominem. Personal attack.
Misdirection. I never claimed myself that Microsoft should or should not include applications with Windows. What my point was that Microsoft write the Windows OS for the best interests of themselves and their business partners, and not for the best interests of the end users who are expected to pay for the software. That is clear and undeniable … so Windows apologists steer immediately away from this point.
Misses the point. Microsoft are hardly going to achieve an improvement in Vista’s dog performance by removing applets and keeping the same core, are they?
Self-fufilling claim … you utterly fail to address the points made, then you claim that no-one addresses them. Well duh.
Edited 2008-12-03 23:15 UTC
It would be really cool if you would simply grow up and learn how the world works, especially how businesses operate.
And don’t give me that f**king bullshit about you not caring whether Windows includes added software. You have whined and cried about this for ages.
Yes lemur2 is quite entertaining at times, ignorance and stupidity always is (hint 3 Stooges?). Seriously lemur2, do you simply not have any other life that obsessing about all things Microsoft? I do not like Ford, nor would I ever own a Ford, but I certainly could give a shit about trolling about Ford products.
Sorry, but you are a god damn troll extraordinaire that consistently posts the same tired rhetoric time and time again, regardless of the god damn topic.
If you love your f–king Ubuntu crap so god damn much, then why not just stick to those topics, and leave these discussions for people that actually give a damn about the topic.
I know perfectly well how businsess operate … any way that they can make a buck.
Some of them operate by providing goods and services that people want and need, and hence are willing to pay for, and some of them operate by trying desperately to remove all other choices, so that consumers are forced to pay them and only them, so they can then charge whatever they want, and they are subsequently able to put massive mark-ups on their goods and services, which they promptly do so.
Personally, I prefer to do business with the former type rather than the latter … but if you prefer to get ripped off by megacorps then go right ahead who am I to stop you?
Quote please.
Here you have made the error known as “Association fallacy”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy
Becuase you have heard some people complaining about what Microsoft chooses to include or not include, you simply assume that I have made such complaints.
The only sense in which I complain about what Microsoft chooses to include or not include is when Microsoft includes only its own proprietary technology at an interoperability interface (such as web facing), and refuses to include any open standard alternatives.
Examples are: WMV and WMA codecs, but not Ogg Vorbis as well (which would cost Microsoft nothing to include). WMF but not SVG (which is the W3C standard). An obscured corruption of SMB but not NFS.
And so on. I don’t mind Microsoft including their own stuff … but I do object to them excluding open interoperability standards which would cost them nothing.
Nice try, but wrong guess. Why on earth would I want to push Canonical? They are but one provider, nothing special. Due to their relative popularity, it is often easier to find articles that refer specifically to Canonical rather than, say, Mandriva.
If you want to divine my actual motivation, here are some clues for you:
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=15…
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/a-microsoft-veteran-embrac…
Intellectual freedom is my motivation. What is your motivation that causes you to shill for Microsoft?
BTW, your post is just more ad hominem attack … Windows apologists really need to try to get a handle on why launching ad hominem attacks really just destroys their own credibility, and not that of their target.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
As for being on topic … this is a Vista thread, is it not? Vista SP2, it says … it is supposed to be discussion about Vista, and whether or not SP2 improves it. I have been posting about Vista and the lack of any improvement in it, especially in the areas of performance and the lack of removal of the anti-user and performance chewing elements of Vista … whereas you have been posting ad hominem attacks against me.
Which of us is off topic, do you think?
There is just one post on this thread that actually points to benchmarks comparing Vista with another OS, showing that Vista is 16% or so slower running userland software on the same hardware. One post with some actual fact. I provided that fact to the discussion … where is your counter-argument (other than personal attacks)?
Finally … on trust. At one time, OSNews posted its “trust” ratings. Mine was quite reasonable, and my posts apparently get 97% positive moderations.
http://www.osnews.com/user/lemur2/
How do you go in comparison?
http://www.osnews.com/user/ssa2204
Oh dear.
Edited 2008-12-04 23:04 UTC
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10112149-56.html?part=rss&subj=ne…
enough said
Pfft. Promises from Microsoft. How reliable is that?
On performance:
http://www.crn.com/software/212201252;jsessionid=UD4E144MQP3TCQSNDL…
Slides 10 and 11 address performance. Vista is a relative dog on the same hardware.
Windows 7 will have the same core as Vista. Microsoft themselves have said so … on that you can probably trust them.
Exactly so.
Edited 2008-12-04 01:41 UTC
Vista is as fast as Win7, same kernel, same core.
I’ll rephrase that:
Vista is as slow as Win7, same kernel, same core.
as of current Windows 7 is faster, though not by the wide margin that it will hopefully be when it is released.
Staff Personally attacking members now thats better.
This is OSNEWS at its best, retards not able to argue their corner.
I love it VistaII is the same as Vista underneath but contains, a really nice feature. “Smoke and Mirrors”. You click a button and it looks like something happens. It responds even when it doesn’t, and the reality is that certain Staff should know that this is *important* this type of programming as been about since the old school green terminals and its very effective. Its good programming. Something Linux DM would benefit from in places. Seriously for most tasks the computer is faster than the user…thats the point. Its no secret that this happens. Anyone who uses a Microsoft Product will be aware this goes on.
Its also an indication something is fundamentally wrong with Vista that comes with a whole host of cashing features that simply do not compensate for Vista or VistaII’s performance problems. I personally do not care whether its due to inefficient coding or DRM its slow, slower than every other platform.
Now whats with DRM!? DRM is part and parcel of Vista it is of VistaII, you can argue its not intrusive, you can sell its positives as an anti-piracy methods, you can argue its benefits to companies like ABC where microsoft disabled the recording of shows, but lets not pretend its not a reality. I’ve simply chosen a DRM free platform, and Microsoft has made what used to be a disadvantage an advantage. I only have have to pay Microsoft’s DRM tax through poorer drivers and more expensive hardware.
I do get some joy from members of staff pissing on OSNEWS users and calling it rain. I object to subterfuge I really like this new Thom, although I will be bringing the interface comments up when he gets all high and mighty when talking about GUI design