Vista SP2 to land today!

I still have it sitting in my Windows update and haven't had time to actually install it

 

Debating whether or not to make the jump right when finals are starting - could be bad ju-ju to use a beta O/S when I need to be studying for finals. :3

I think I'll wait, and bounce over to 64-bit once SP2 is released.

 

:laugh: :laugh: That's what I was thinking too, but then I decided to just give it a go, did the same thing for SP1 and nothing happened....

 

I think I'll pass on Sp2. I'll wait for Windows 7. =P Haha, jk

 

SP2 news

My X-Fi has started to behave weird. I am listening to a song or playing a film and my Senns start to snap, crackle, and pop . On SP1 it was doing this at random intervals but now, it happens almost on every song. I thought they were working on hardware compatibility .

 

I've found Creative's support of vista to be utter crap. I built a Desktop like 3 months after Vista was released and I couldn't use my X-Fi sound card for like another 3 months because Creative didn't write any drivers...honestly with the way Vista handles sound, I don't think it was worth it to buy a dedicated sound card over integrated solutions on most motherboards.

 

Well, I finally got it loaded up late last night. Seems to be running OK. Feels faster to the desktop than SP1.

Played some media and did not experience any sound problems.

So far so good!

 

More:

Eventlog shows about 6-8000ms reduction in boot time from what I was experiencing in SP1. Now booting in 41893ms - shutdown in 12008ms.

RAM usage is up about 15-20mb at idle.

 

I was rather hoping they'd get around to improving that. Vista's boot time was an immediate disappointment when I first got my laptop: the machine is at least twice as fast as my old one in every respect and the boot time is... the same?! Or maybe even a bit slower? I guess they didn't think most people restart their computers often enough to care, but I do.

That's OK, you'd have to be looking for it to even notice that unless you have very little RAM. It's less than a percent of my 3-odd GB.

 

Seems to load apps faster, and wireless connection seems a lot stronger. overall os seems faster indeed, maybe responsive a better word. Just need to see after a longer period if it holds out.

 

How is it some people have it in their windows update and I don't. I am running Vista Ultimate x64

 

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...A3-4B2C-4F1C-8B3E-DE376FDB1DE8&displaylang=en

 

Hi.

Just installed it, took 17 mins and 2 re-boots , no errors.

If you have Vista32 for a direct link , files is 388mb

Watermark is white, and i have a light wallpaper and i can barely see it.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...CC-362A-4B4D-B62B-22780E839A7E&displaylang=en

Regards

John.

 

I took a few reboots after installation for my watermark to show up - but it doesn't bug me at all, I don't stare at my desktop too often.

 

FOR CREATIVE X-FI USERS:

Try switching between modes, that seems to fix the crackling for me. Normally switching to music and then back to gaming does it for me.

ALSO:
You can download the BETA here:
Vista x86:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...cc-362a-4b4d-b62b-22780e839a7e&DisplayLang=en

Vista x64:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...A3-4B2C-4F1C-8B3E-DE376FDB1DE8&displaylang=en

 

The O/S seems a little more, snappy. Might be a placebo effect though. The last time I tried this one beta via this one .bat file, which had like v.113 or something, it didn't feel any different. But the new wireless manager is nice on the real beta release.

 

How did you get it in "Windows Update" it is not in any sort of wide release. Betas usually do not show up in "Windows Update", unless you specifically tweak the registry, like was done for folks to get an early release of SP1.

Gary

 

A specific list of the "Hotfixes and Security" updates rolled up in SP2 can be seen here:

SP Hotfixes and Security Patches

Gary

 

Thanks Gary. I used the magic format command. I cannot take the whole "failed to load desktop error". The past month I formatted and formatted and I did not get rid of that error. I am going crazy. I will put Vienna and forget about Vista. I am using XP+Sp3 now, it is not as sexy as Vista but it is very stable and it does not make me want to go bonkers.

 

Wait, what? Didn't you just install Vista SP2 just the other day? Is there something wrong with it?

 

There is nothing wrong with it. The SP1 error I had is still there. 3 out of 10 reboots yield with cannot load desktop. I've had it with that piece error. I installed Vista so many times because of that. No, SP2 is nice but I loathe that error!!!!!!

 

Try going into safe mode and create another user accuont and see if you don't get that cannot load to desktop error.

 

I tried everything mate. I am toying with this issue for more than a month. It is a VISTA issue no doubt. As I previously mentioned, it is not a SP2 issue. It is the SP1 issue I had a long time ago. I was eager to try SP2 hoping this was a priority for Microsoft. I raised the problem on MSDN. They did not fix it. Yesterday, I shut down my lappy, this morning my desktop would not load. I had to reboot 4 times until Vista decided to load it. This is something I am not willing to accept any more.

 

I still think this is NOT a Vista error, I am pretty sure it is a driver problem. Do you ever look at the system logs to see if you get any more detailed information? Specifically, look for information at the time you shut down the system. What I am suspecting is that Vista is unable to close the registry file correctly when it shuts down. This is almost ALWAYS due to a faulty application or driver and when it happens, the very error you are seeing can be the result. When Vista goes to start up the "funky" registry is giving it fits. When I did a Google search on the error you mentioned (albeit worded a bit differently than what you provided) I found several references to this sort of thing under Vista and XP as well.

Can you send me a link to the MSDN messages you left? Were there any replies?

Gary

 

Yes Gary. Had there been detailed info in the event log....but there wasn't. Can't remember where I put them...did this month ago and I gave up on it when I saw the bull registry tweaks I had to do. On thing I noticed tho, Vista stated that the Asus Camera driver was not letting it shutdown in the default time. In uninstalled and used the lappy without a camera for a week and no joy. Hell, I uninstalled all the apps forcing Vista to stay on and no change. I've never had this issue with XP since it came out. Vista is cocky when it comes to drivers. Asus might have done something and Vista does not like it. I thought SP2 brought in some XP flexibility but it did not. The same crap, cannot load desktop, Windows Explorer shut downs, the Nero 9 forced close to "protect my computer", and of course, last but not least, the annoying message on Adobe Camera Raw 5: The lappy takes some time to process the RAW from my D3 and Vista says it takes too long and gives a not responding message. In any case, I will give it another shot when SP2 final comes out, maybe!!!, but Vienna is my next OS.



P.S: The problem is worded differently. Vista Verbose mode is not a big help either. I am very crossed. I had a slideshow today and my desktop would not load...I had to create a temp one and apologise for the delay....

 

Reg tweal, automatically download the latest BETA for SP2. I got it about a week before the first SP2 BETA. Hence v.105.

 

Installed SP2 about 30 minutes ago. So far no problems, and I can't really tell any difference right now since all I've been doing is browse the internets.

 

So, lets be honest. Why cant Vista SP2 sound like XP SP3? My Audigy X-Fi is a different animal. The clarity and the crisp sound it gives. The Vista layer might be advanced but it is incompatible and rubbish. Shame...Will SP2 fix these??

 

Because it's a beta? With time my friend...

 

I hope you are right. But...atm, the gave us Bluetooth 2.1 .

 

Hi.

I am totality overwhelmed by the 0% difference in performance since i installed SP2 Beta , I cannot wait full release

Regards

John.

 

I think Wishmaker's problem is his addon-soundcard.

Creative support for Vista has been horrid.

Other sound cards work extremely well in Vista, but they had to re-write the drivers because Vista changed the driver model. Creative has NOT had zippy support for Vista.

Quite frankly, if you want to use a Creative Labs soundcard, odds are you should just use XP.

 

I'll have to repatch my theme files, but it's all good.

I'll note one big advantage that's always been true about Windows Classic. It "feels" faster than Aero.

 

If you could, could you post a screenshot of the new wireless manager? Mine still looks the same as SP1.

 

There is a download from Microsoft that applies a registry tweak so that Windows Update shows the SP2 beta: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...34-BF27-4953-B907-764C4682714C&displaylang=en

 

Because the folks at Creative don't know how to write a decent driver. Their hardware is great, their drivers suck. The drivers are responsible for the sound not Vista.

Gary

 

Thanks Crash. I knew such a registry tweak existed for SP1, but didn't know it existed for SP2.

Gary

 

Yea, from what I recall, there wasn't an "official" tweak offered by Microsoft for SP1. I'm sure they realized though that so many people were messing with their registry to get SP1 in Windows Update that it would be better off to offer an official one so people don't mess up their computers.

 

In any case, I must thank Asus and Microsoft for their love to customers. I used XP Pro+Sp3 for 1 hour. I enjoyed the quality of my X-Fi and I realised I needed to install some ATK drivers and the Intel Storage Manager, latest version. I installed the drivers from the Asus website and the storage manager. Rebooted and my keyboard started lagging. win+e (open explorer) took around 30 secs, whereas, double clicking on Windows Explorer opened instantly. I made a comparison in real time between my PRESCOTT (used win+e) and my laptop. The PRESCOTT would open Win Explorer instantly, whereas the latter would have moments of pause and sometimes freeze the mouse. Typing in word was not in real time. The ATK drivers and kb hotfix are vital to have some features .

Bottom line? I am back on Vista SP1 with half the software because I am afraid my Desktop Error will come back . My laptop has no proper support for Vista and for XP. In my opinion, Vista should have been more forgiving and more open to programmers.

I recall when SP3 came out for testing and it had a huge issue with older pci wi-fi cards. The windows wlan api was not backward compatible and manufacturers were not offering any updates because they discontinued the product. The drivers would fail to install properly and a nice wlan error would show up at every startup. I made a report to MS about this issue. Was it fix when Sp3 final came out? No. My elder D-Link and Netgear adapters are using minimal features because of this. This is a huge Vista move. Coming back to Sp2, rather than focusing from zero with a flexible environment, MS has other priorities.

 

Well, I installed sp2, and noticed a further increase in boot times.
It's over 2 minutes now, whereas before it was 96 seconds (and there's a good pause before the desktop shows up in contrast to before when there was no waiting).
Strange.
Perhaps some of the services reactivated.

I dunno ... thus far I'm not really impressed.
Performance difference is 0% from what I can tell right now ... and this morning when I opened the lid (I set the laptop in low power mode and shut down the screen/closed the lid) there was no image.
Had to restart in order to resume standard working.

Oh well ... gonna see if I can shave off the boot time over the next day or so and see what can further be done to improve performance.
If not ... I'll probably finally go back to XP SP3

 

i confirm, boot time increases on my other 3 lappies..

 

The first few boots after installation were slow for me too, but since cleaning up (cc, defrag,etc) it is now quicker. Give it time to prefetch and do its' readyboot thing like an initial Vista install.

Mine is now logging 10sec less boot time to desktop on average and apps seem to load faster than with SP1.

 

PS: My boot time is now 36.8 seconds. Was around 47 seconds before SP2.

I have not really removed any startup items other than uninstalling some of the bloatwear that came with my HDX16. The only services I have disabled is the remote desktop stuff.

 

Think about what you are asking for. You want Microsoft to patch the operating system because some manufacturer did not write their drivers to the specs? Pretty soon the OS would be a mess of patches. I don't think that model makes a lot of sense.

Gary

 

Actually that is to be expected. Until the new bootfiles are defragged and optimized the boot time will suffer. See the link in my signature below for more specifics.

Gary

 

I do regular maintenance on all my computers and defrag is one one of them.
I disabled both prefetch and readyboost because the first one worked a lot on my hdd ALL the time ... and the second one I don't need because I have 3GB of RAM.
Plus I only have the bare essentials starting up with the OS ... Nod32, DaemonTools, sound card driver and nvidia drivers (4 things in total).

Gary ... I downloaded and ran the file (same technique I did on my XP system a week ago).
The total boot up time was measured with re-boot ... and came down to about 116 seconds in total (the final 6 seconds was the shut-down time so in reality 110 seconds was the boot-up time).

I still don't understand why so much time is needed for my Vista to boot up.
Capella1 ... what Vista do you have installed, and what did you do to it to get so low boot-up time?
I usually got that boot time on my XP. Vista takes far longer.
I use a pre-installed Vista Home Premium btw (came with my laptop) ... but I removed the extra Acer garbage that came with the system on the first day, optimized Vista, cleaned out everything, shut down numerous processes using black-viper advice on his website, defragmented (plus I use TuneUP for registry cleanings instead of CC) and my boot up time is still way too big.
What's the deal exactly?

I can probably do a full format of the system and do it from the get go if it's needed.
It would probably be cleaner as well ... but given the fact I cleaned out the system on the first day ...

EDIT: one important factor I forgot to mention was that I have a 5400rpm (SATA) hdd.
That alone contributes to longer boot times, so I guess there's a good possibility that's the main culprit.

 

For those who don't want to download it via Windows Update, you can download the Standalone package here.

 

First, re-enable readyboost. "ReadybooT" relies on "readybooST to cache a bootfile for faster loading.

I'm runnin X64 Ultimate and I too have only a 250gb 5400rpm sata drive. See sig for other sytem specs.

As I said, I have not messed with disabling services other than remote desktop and remote access stuff, nor have I disabled any startup stuff other than uninstalling some bloatwear.

My boot time of 35 - 37 seconnds includes loading sidebar with 4 gadgets and objectdock, and my home wireless connection is usually initialized by the time the desktop is available.

I don't know why so many seem to suffer from extended boot times but I can say that I was not impressed with the so called tweaks listed around the web and went back to a normal startup with all services after messing with that stuff. My system seemed to suffer from too much disabling.

One other thing - msconfig advanced boot options: I have checked two processers and 4096 RAM, then commited to permanent boot config for normal startup. IMO selective startups are slower, but that may not be more than a perception on my part.

 

Oh, and im letting windows manage my pagefile

 

try disabling everything in the bios. bluetooth, card readers, webcam, wlan etc.. what ever you can, and test boottime then (several reboots to have everything balanced). if it's much faster, one of those devices where culprit. my card readers and such on the pc (all built in stuff connected on internal usb ports on the mainboard) took 2 min of boottime. i haven't used those at all yet so i've taken it out..