Slashdot Mirror
Windows Vista SP1 Meeting Sour Reception In Places
Stony Stevenson writes "A day after it was released for public download, Windows Vista SP1 is drawing barbs from some computer users who say the software wrecked their systems. 'I downloaded it via Windows Update, and got a bluescreen on the third part of the update,' wrote 'Iggy33' in a comment posted Wednesday on Microsoft's Vista team blog. Iggy33 was just one of dozens of posters complaining about Vista Service Pack 1's effect on their PCs. Other troubles reported by Vista SP1 users ranged from a simple inability to download the software from Microsoft's Windows Update site to sudden spikes in memory usage. To top it all off, the service pack will not install on computers that use peripheral device drivers that Microsoft has deemed incompatible."
I'm very happy with SP1. I've been very critical of Vista. But now I can say that I wouldn't go back to XP.
One day I hope to enter a store, pick up a brand new hot game and find a sticker on it:
"WINE COMPATIBLE"
I installed SP1 on my desktop, laptop and several machines at work. There wasn't a single problem. My desktop had an "incompatible driver" and so I had to download SP1 from the MS website, but it installed fine and the driver is also working fine.
This sort of thing is normal with major OS updates. Even OS 10.5 had some major problems when users upgraded. And, honestly, unless you're like me and testing the service pack for work-related reasons... why are you installing it the day it was released? That's just dumb. At least wait a week.
My only real beef is you can't slipstream the new service pack into the install disk. That's going to be a pain in the ass next time I install Vista.
well said. I kicked off my sp1 install and went to lunch. Came back to a machine needing 1 reboot, and then back into my work. Later found I needed to reinstall my monitor driver which was apparently not certified. Took 5 mins.
the fact that a few people might be moaning wildly does not mean the service pack met with a bad reception. This is the only place where it is vaguely an issue.
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
Most of us have to use Microsoft products in one way or another. It would be nice if SlashDot wasn't so blatantly negative and biased towards them. Or can some one recommend a technology news site that gives me a fair assessment of cool stuff?
.. by suggesting that the 4gb memory stick would operate a lot faster if I put it into a high speed plug which was available on my Dell 2407wfp rather than in the top tray of the Antec 900 case. I hadn't figured that one out myself for some reason.
Had to transfer files (photos) from my D70s memory card to my wife's USB stick so she could bring some shots to her work. Estimated time before I moved the stick was 15-20 minutes; just moving the stick to the monitor it took 2-3.
In effect it was saying, hey you got a high speed usb stick, why plug it into a slow connector when you have a fast one available for use.
I for one thought that was sweet, especially as I just dodged the worst Melbourne morning traffic by not having to stay home another 15 minutes.
ISO certified == THX certified
It always amazes me how people can be so defensive about such simple operations.
Almost every Linux distribution can manage this without any problem. Many of them doing it for free (as in beer).
And yet you're saying that Microsoft could not. Whatever.
That's okay with me. Just warn me about the risks and get the hell out of my way. The point, to me, of those little warning boxes is not to dissuade people from accessing the sites/loading the drivers that they want. The point is just to let the user know that they're now leaving the Supported Zone and entering the shady world of Your Own Discretion.
DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
but the OS actually works now.
After installing the service pack certain things are incredibly faster.
1) startup: Before installing the service pack it took my computer (Hell laptop with 1.6ghz dual core AMD processor, 4GB RAM) 20 minutes to become usable. Now I can use my computer within 2 minutes of logging in to my domain. It seems like the indexing that happens actually runs in the backgroung and doesn't interfere with apps that you want to run in the foreground.
2) Browsing the domain network. Before installing the service pack, I could double-click on Network and watch the green bar slowly crawl across the top until finally after 5 minutes computers would appear. Now it is instantaneous.
3) Outlook 07 (probably related to the indexing changes). Before installing the service pack it took 5 minutes for Outlook to become usable and half the time it would tell me the local file closed incorrectly and it would now "repair" the file. Now Outlook takes abetween 20 and 40 seconds to be usable and downloading e-mail is much quicker. I haven't gotten the Incorrect file closure message yet either, and I have been opening and closing Outlook all day.
The new remote desktop removed the stupid login window.
The only thing I need to check on is if you still can't change IP settings when you first sign on. It used to take 5 minutes to be able to change IP settings.
The only complaint I have is that installing the Service Pack took alittle over 4 hours.
I'm a happy pessimist. I expect and prepare for the worst, when it doesn't happen I am pleasantly surprised.
That's fair. I guess I'd be satisfied if the installer refused to load initially, but suggested that you go disable the driver by hand and then try re-enabling it after the upgrade.
That would at least introduce some barriers for the newbies, without preventing the power users from trying whatever non-standard stuff they want to try.
DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
And word on the grapevine is that one of those drivers (the fujitsu one, iirc) happily treads on internal data structures in the kernel with hardcoded offsets.
:(
Those offsets changed when the new kernel was built, and the data structure in question was never published directly in the first place, it should have been manipulated via a proper API.
The result? When you *move* a system with the shock-monitor driver? the entire system crashes because that data structure is now garbage. That's right. Physically move the system, and it blue-screens.
Yet the nvidia driver in linux? Doing the same thing, potentially (it doesn't even have to actually do it, the kernel developers just believe that it does, and they may or may not be right, since I haven't checked), and the kernel devs will refuse to talk to you if that driver's loaded when the kernel crashes.
Microsoft at least takes it seriously, and the manufacturer was asked to produce a new driver, which they appear to have done.
This is the price you pay for getting OEM drivers. OEMs take shortcuts and horrible hacks to get the job done. Yet you constantly hear linux users clamouring for more support from OEMs. Personally, I think linux might just be better off even if it does reduce the amount of supported hardware in the short term.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't
Are you kidding? Disabling the device would have users furious, and rightly so. And it may not be possible to skip the parts which are incompatible... but only Microsoft can tell us that one.
I'm confused, or perhaps it's the Magners. But why is it that a device that was supported under Vista isn't supported under Vista SP1?
Agreed, disabling devices would be bad and refusing to install on a working machine is good but did Microsoft take a red pen to the supported devices list in SP1?
...the vast majority of these comments are not bashing Microsoft. Who are you people, and what have you done with the regular Slashdot community?
With Windows, unsupported means that it didn't receive Microsoft Seal of Approval (regardless of whether the driver itself is in alpha, beta, or production stage, and regardless of whether it correctly uses published API).
... because it is impossible to support the driver (i.e. it's a binary blob with no source code available).
With Linux, the kernel, something would be unsupported
No. In both cases, unsupported means the VENDOR doesn't support it.
You seem to be conflating this with Microsofts driver signing inititives and testing labs but that's got nothing to do with it. You can load unsigned drivers in Vista. (although in x64 you have to jump through a hoop to make it happen, but that's beside the point.) Most of the problem drivers in question are, in fact, signed.
We're talking a list of definite blacklist outright known to be 'incompatible', not merely 'unsigned'. Microsoft has TESTED the drivers and found they didn't work with SP1, and so it 'blacklisted' them, so users computers wouldn't fail. It requires users update to newer versions before it will install SP1.
Most of the blacklisted drivers ARE Windows Logo Certified and passed previous WHQL testing. But they broke in SP1. Whether that's because Vista changed something or because the drivers were buggy all along and it just was unmasked now I can't really say. But its beside the point and doesn't really matter.
This could happen just as easily with linux. A new kernel version could uncover a flaw with an older driver even if that driver was opensource. And that older driver package would be flagged as incompatible with the new kernel, and the updaters would prevent you from mixxing them. Its not exactly as if this has never happened before.
And what happens then? Assuming the community has the time and inclination a new fixed driver will be released. In the case of windows, you have to wait for the vendor to have the time and inclination. But in either case, someone has to come up with a NEW version of the driver because the old one doesn't work.
In this particular case it sounds like new drivers ARE mostly available, so Vista is only preventing you from updating until you install those newer versions.
As far as the users go, I don't see any double standard here. Just normal reactions. If it doesn't seem that way to you, well, prove me wrong and show me a GPL'd Linux kernel module (... that isn't marked "EXPERIMENTAL" or is in alpha stage) that a kernel developer says is unsupported and will do nothing to fix any problems with it.
Whether or not they are willing to fix it is irrelevant. No amount of willingness to fix it is going to magically make the existing version compatible. The -best- they can do is release a new version that is compatible whether its a new version of the kernel or a new version of the driver -- some where a bug or design flaw has to be fixed.
But combination of that driver and that kernel are ALWAYS going to be incompatible, and the package managers by default block you from mixxing packages with known incompatibility problems.
I blame users for a lot of problems with MS in general. But there's something to be said for a system that manages that careful balance between providing security and not bugging the user so much about potential security threats that they get numbed into clicking OK over and over again. Vista, straight up, is crap. I'm a unfortunately expert Windows user and find Vista more frustrating than I can easily [You're writing negative thing about Windows Vista, allow or cancel?] express in writing. [Using punctuation in slashdot can be dangerous, allow or cancel?]
I'm sorry, no user should be harassed as much about security as Vista does, and no OS should crash so thoroughly and often as Vista does with just OEM-installed software installed.
Ubuntu's not perfect. 2008 will again not be the year of Linux on the desktop. When things break on Ubuntu they can get hairy to fix -- but there's an active community to help, built-in tools, effective logging, and materials to support debugging and tracing the problem to the underlying situation.
Mac does a good job. I just recommend everyone who's not into Linux move to Apple. It works, it's simple, it's pretty. Sure it's more expensive, but subtract the man hours you and/or your geeky nephew spend, anti-virus/adware subscriptions, and geeksquad visits and you're even.
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
My experience with SP1 has been fairly pleasant so far, except for one thing.
I had the Korean language pack installed on vista ultimate, and SP1 setup refused to run because I had a language installed that wasn't designed for the SP (only french spanish japanese german and english or something like that), even though I had english as my primary... So I had to totally uninstall the korean language pack and restart before it'd let me install SP1. -_-. Other than that it's fine though!
I was shopping for laptops around November. They all had Vista installed. I asked the geek at Best Buy how they ran with XP installed instead and he replied "You can't install XP on these because there aren't any device drivers for this new hardware."
That did it, I bought a used XP laptop on Ebay for $200. Heck it even plays World of Warcraft. Runs linux too! Of course I spent about $200 more upgrading the thing's RAM, HDD, and Wifi, and then a couple weeks screwing around with it. Nice ultra-portable though.
Vista, ROFL! I'll be getting that in about 3 years probably, after it actually works somewhat half-assed decent.
Clickety Click
I hear with Vista it was more like this
Microsoft-to-Realtek: Here's the API
Realtek: Thanks man, lets get this driver done
Microsoft-to-Realtek: The API changed, here's a new one
Realtek: Damn, back to the drawing board
Microsoft-to-Realtek: We've just improved the API, it's different now
Realtek: Double damn, this is getting irritating but nevertheless lets solider on
Microsoft-to-Realtek: Here's another API
Realtek: Fuck this