Windows Vista SP1 and Windows XP SP3 Announced by Microsoft

<!-- Generated by XStandard version 1.7.1.0 on 2007-08-29T14:30:28 -->

Microsoft this afternoon announced to its beta testing community that Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) will soon be available for testing with a public release date of Q1 2008. Windows XP SP3 will also be out for testing and publicly available in the first half 2008.

Microsoft revealed that a small group of testers have had the Vista SP1 in their hands for a couple of weeks now and that Microsoft TechNet and MSDN subscribers will be able to download SP1 in the coming weeks. The beta will be 50MB, but the public standalone final version will be 1GB to support all Windows Vista platforms and languages.

So what exactly will SP1 cover? Microsoft has an entire white paper you can read if you'd like the dirty details, but here's a quick rundown from that paper.

Security

Security improvements that will be in Windows Vista SP1 include:

• Provides security software vendors a more secure way to communicate with Windows Security Center.
• Includes application programming interfaces (APIs) by which third-party security and malicious software detection applications can work with kernel patch protection on x64 versions of Windows Vista. These APIs help ISVs develop software that extends the functionality of the Windows kernel on x64 computers without disabling or weakening the protection offered by kernel patch protection.
• Improves the security of running RemoteApp programs and desktops by allowing Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) files to be signed. Customers can differentiate user experiences based on publisher identity.
• Adds an Elliptical Curve Cryptography (ECC) pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) to the list of available PRNGs in Windows Vista.
• Enhances BitLocker Drive Encryption (BDE) to offer an additional multifactor authentication method that combines a key protected by the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) with a Startup key stored on a USB storage device and a user-generated personal identification number (PIN).

Reliability

Windows Vista SP1 will include improvements that target some of the most common causes of crashes and hangs, giving users a more consistent experience. Many of these improvements will specifically address issues identified from the Windows Error Reporting tool. The following list describes some of the reliability improvements that Windows Vista SP1 will include:

• Improved reliability and compatibility of Windows Vista when used with newer graphics cards in several specific scenarios and configurations.
• Improved reliability when working with external displays on a laptop.
• Improved Windows Vista reliability in networking configuration scenarios.
• Improved reliability of systems that were upgraded from Windows XP to Windows Vista.
• Increased compatibility with many printer drivers.
• Increased reliability and performance of Windows Vista when entering sleep and resuming from sleep.

Performance

The following list describes some of the performance improvements that Windows Vista SP1 will include:

• Improves the speed of copying and extracting files.
• Improves the time to become active from Hibernate and Resume modes.
• Improves the performance of domain-joined PCs when operating off the domain; in the current release version of Windows Vista, users would experience long delays when opening the File dialog box.
• Improves performance of Windows® Internet Explorer® 7 in Windows Vista, reducing CPU utilization and speeding JavaScript parsing.
• Improves battery life by reducing CPU utilization by not redrawing the screen as frequently, on certain computers.
• Improves the logon experience by removing the occasional 10-second delay between pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL and the password prompt displaying.
• Addresses an issue in the current version of Windows Vista that makes browsing network file shares consume significant bandwidth and not perform as fast as expected.

According to Microsoft Installing the Vista SP1 service pack will require a large amount of free disk space (7 GB for x86 and 12 GB for x64). However, most of this space will be reclaimed after installation.

 

Windows XP SP3

SP3 will essentially be just a roll-up of all the security updates and hotfixes that have occurred since SP2 was released. There will be no new features in SP3 other than adding Network Access Protection to XP -- a feature that exists in Windows Vista already. Release of Windows XP SP3 is scheduled for sometime in the first half of 2008.

 

too bad this isn't coming out sooner.

 

... how utterly useful

 

Hmm. Not gonna be released on MSDN AA, will it?

 

Sorry, MS! I was going to think about migrating over Winter Break, but since you can't release anything in a timely fashion it'll be at least summer of 2008 now!

Cool!

 

Hmm, wonder what MS will think of people who get SP1 through torrents. I don't think they'll really care. In fact, they'll get a bigger focusgroup that way...

 

I'm at least glad to seem some progress towards this much needed service pack. Guess I have a while to wait though.

 

"Customers can differentiate user experiences based on publisher identity."

Heh heh Heh.

That seems like a fancy way of saying "Better finger pointing at bad third party software, so people will stop blaming Microsoft"

I love the wording. Is that yours (Andrew) or right from Microsoft's white paper?

/Former Microsoft Engineer

 

after all I had heard about vista, I thought it was going to be bad... It's actually not too bad, sure some bugs but I was expecting something along the lines of Windows ME...

 

said by and directly quoted from MS. Pretty funny insight there.

 

Well at least that's made up my mind about buying anything with Vista until next year. Thanks M$...

And if I feel compelled to, I'll be crowbarring XP on it.

 

it is, these days when you do an XP install you have to download a kabillion hotfixes even though you have SP2. Kinda ironic though, because it makes it even easier to install XP now.

 

And you don't know about those hotfixes and they don't get downloaded through Windows update.

 

and I completely don't understand what you just wrote.

 

I guess I'll be waiting to migrate to Vista also.

 

I'm downloading it right now

There is at least 8000 persons on the torrent and it was released yesterday.

It does 700MB

I'm a technet subscribers so I should get the email soon anyway. I'm not really on a genuine vista but that's because hotmail threw away "thanks for participating in vista beta, now we give you a vista ultimate copy!" email in the junk filter

 

Wait, you mean that Vista Basic wasn't XP SP3? My bad...

 

In other words, force XP to go through the same non-ending ET Phone Home vaildation garbage that Vista now currently goes through.

Looks like I'll be giving that one a pass.

 

Ummm, not really. Unless you can find documentation that this 'feature' does that. Oh, and XP validates every time you update anyway...so why is that different?

SP3 will have more than just this one thing. It is all the hotfixes, and various other things, that have accumulated since SP2. That means, in theory, all those hotfixes (which MS recommends you only install if you are severely affected by a particular bug) will now be fully tested and integrated. Dual core hotpatches, RAM crap, etc, etc...a lot of it fixed.

 

I am still not optimistic about service pack 1 for Vista. I'll believe the projected improvements when I see them. The first service pack won't nessicarily bring the much needed improvements. As was the case with Windows XP SP1. XP didn't get to where it is now until SP2 was released.

 

Well, there were earlier reports that SP1 could possibly make it out in Q4 2007. What resulted was an uproar of complaints saying this time frame would result in a garbage SP release and people would wait for SP2.

Now there are people complaining that they have to wait for SP1 to release which delays their switch over to Vista.

I mean, there are really only two options: release now or later. You shouldn't get to complain about both. Maybe its different people complaining, but it does highlight the fact that there is absolutely no way to please everybody.

 

For people still installing Windows XP SP2 and THEN all the hotfixes... you do know you can slipstream all the hotfixes before the install, right?

 

Slipstreaming is more effort than running the Windows Update website.

About Vista: I tried copying a 400MB file and it choked. The estimated time to completion was like 3 months and going up. Needless to say, I nuked the drive and copied back on one of my XP backups.

 

I slipstreamed my XP install disk to SP2 + fixes, it's really a great way to breath life into an older install disk. Plus, it is completely legal and supported by Microsoft!

As for Vista, aside from the slow network file tranfers (read: absurd treatment of packet travel), I was pleasantly surprised when I finally decided to take the plunge and update to Vista in July.

It really does work quite well, I find that it crashes less than XP (for me, but I'm a power user) and it works will all of my legacy software and games.

The only negative I can ever really point out about Vista is that crappy file transfer issue.

BUT GUESS WHAT!?

Microsoft released an update in this week's tuesday patch that significantly improved my file transfer times over network. File transfers, especially of large files, have improved in speed over 100%. This isn't as fantastic as it sounds, because before file transfer was practically broken, but it is a real step in the right direction.

So at this point, I'd recommend Vista to just about anyone.

Then again, when I get bored/sick of vista, I am lucky enough to be able to boot right into OSX!

 

I dunno I am still a fan of XP. Thats why I made sure and was willing to spend a little extra money to make sure my new laptop would have XP pro or media center on it. Besides vista being buggy, it is a very resource intensive OS. Granted every new OS requires more resources, I wanted more resources for my applications such as Photoshop and games.

I am new to the world of laptops and I figure 3-4 years is about the life expectancy of a laptop to keep up with the new games and some of the media art and video editing programs. I am planning on keeping this laptop for hopefully 4 or 5 years and although that is quite a stretch of time, especially for a machine that will be running XP I think it will be worth it to conserve my resources.

I remember when I built my PC 4-5 years ago I installed Windows 2000 professional on it. At that time I also liked 2000 pro much more than XP. If I remember correctly I think it was in 2005 that I finally updated to XP pro because I felt it was stable enough. Now on my laptop I am running XP media center.

Granted I haven't owned a PC with vista. But I have a friend that installed it on his desktop (on a second partition to test it out) and he hated all the DRM and resources the OS consumed.

Most likely I will wait until vista is cheaper, has SP2, and I build another desktop (or purchase a new laptop a few years from now) that is powerful enough to take advantage of the OS and not see any performance decreases. I wouldn't say vista is bad, it is just very incomplete and released at a sorta-awkward time in the "switch-over" of a lot of new technology!

 

Because I've turned automatic updates off altogether in XP. I use Belarc Personal Advisor and manually update the patches I need from the IT section of Microsoft's website.

http://www.belarc.com/free_download.html

I don't need to have Microsoft snooping on my machine all the time and I certainly don't like the direction Vista is taking with this. If they can't trust me with their OS then why should I trust them.

Well that's all nice, but I'm willing to sacrifice some convenience for privacy from big brother Microsoft. Been doing it for years.

 

It's such a joke to see "Beta" service packs - I pity all Windows users.

 

They are making changes that can affect tens of thousands of programs, hundreds of millions of users and a very large enterprise presence. They are giving developers, users, and IT managers a chance to let Microsoft know what if any programs stop working or start working differently. A sample size this large is simply too large to test effectively across.

 

Christ, you mean I have to wait MONTHS for my computer to stop disconnecting my bluetooth mouse every time my damned lappy wakes from sleep??? Man, I really should've gone xp!

 

1GB for an update is insane, Especially in countries like Australia where 200-500mb a MONTH is still quite common for many home download plans.

 

Wow thanks microsoft. In a world where laptop sales have eclipsed desktop sales, where the whole planet has realised not only the convienience of going mobile but rather the necessity to do so for both business and social networking, you have released Vista, an OS which has decreased battery life and therefore lessened our chances of staying mobile. And your going to tell us that after an entire year in development the only thing you can do to give us back our battery life is to make the screen redraw less. Your worth every penny of the billions you acquire, not.

Although I love Vista and use it as my main OS I reckon the requirements of those of us who need to have a laptop which is actually able to turn on and stay on means i'm gonna have to go back to XP or just run OSX86 again and do my best to optimize an already optimized experience. Especially considering Microdoft dont seem bothered to do it themselves. Gotta go, battery is on critical.

 

Get better computer hardware and Vista will be the best desktop OS today.

 

Vista is definately an OS that only really "shines" (read: The WOW is now) when installed onto a high-end computer.

In other words, Vista is not much better than XP unless you have at least a Core 2 Duo (2.4 GHz), 2 gb of ram, and a dedicated gfx card.

Vista is fantastically superior to XP on my laptop, but it's running a 2.4 Ghz T7700, 4 gb of Ram, and an 8600m GT, not much old hardware there.

Still, I also have Vista installed on a Pentium 4 (3.6 Ghz), 2 gb Ram, ATI x800m and it still runs pretty swell. Lower than that, and I'd keep XP unless you want your operating system to run like Lost Planet on a GMA950.

 

... my first post

Sorry to sound like a n00b... this is something I should already know but something I haven't known and that i have been too embarrassed to ever ask ... do you get the SP download for free or will you have to buy a whole new windows vista?

 

Assuming Microsoft is smart, it would be free like all previous service packs.

To gain additional profits, Microsoft may screw consumers who doesn't have a good connection by charging them exorbitant prices for the DVD+shipping like they did for the Express Upgrade.

 

Thanks Ive been sticking with XP SP2 on my Desktop no need for sp upgrades so... Ill just buy a laptop with XP home i guess . doubt 85$ more for windows vista home premium is worth it for the performance drag

 

If you could, it'd probably be a better idea to at least try to buy XP Professional instead of XP Home. Home isn't all that bad, but it is worth it to get Professional if you are going to stick with XP for awhile.

I'd still recommend Vista Home Premium if you are buying a laptop worth more than $1400 USD.

 

Im looking at a lower end one so i have the choice of xp pro or home premium for 80$ more but i cannot afford that its that or get rid of shiny screen, battery(9cell instead of 6), and a couple other things

 

Extreme tech wrote an article that I would recommend anyone considering Vista read.

Here it is.

Vista is doing VERY well.

 

thanks for the artical

 

Although vista has great possibilities, especially for future and current high end desktops, for most laptop users I would recommend an 'upgrade' to XP pro or media center.

Who wants to bet that SP3 will make XP suck and it will force you to upgrade unless you go threw loopholes and make the average user upgrade to the "better" OS Vista?! j/k

Being a Gamer, sure like others have stated if you have 2.4ghz C2D and 2G of ram you can run vista. But I would rather use half of those resources for my OS and more of it for my games...but I really couldn't care less about the OS except for something to launch my software environments. If I could have a fully operational command line/list interface OS that allows me to boot the applications I want allowing multiple applications to run and required 100mhz of CPU and 40 MB of RAM I would pick that...lol...but that is just me I guess...

 

Is this a misprint? From 50MB to 1GB to allow for languages and various platforms for SP1? wow.