1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Real Reason Vista SP1 Delayed: Very Little Compatibility With Third-Party Apps

Discussion in 'News' started by zekrahminator, Feb 22, 2008.

  1. zekrahminator

    zekrahminator McLovin

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    9,113 (2.85/day)
    Thanks Received:
    321
    Location:
    My house.
    It turns out that stability isn't the only problem Vista SP1 has with the world. There are plenty of products that simply won't work with Service Pack 1. Now wait a minute, you might ask. This has been going on since every operating system update from the beginning of computers, what makes this one so special? When the products are from big shots like Trend Micro, Zonelabs, BitDefender, and Novell, Microsoft is more than willing to consider delaying Vista SP1 to make sure that everything will work properly. While some products are fortunate, and merely have a couple glitches, the majority of the programs listed on Microsoft's great list of incompatibility won't even start properly. The main cause of this could be anything from coding differences in the kernel to being flat out blocked. Hopefully, Microsoft will fix this by the time SP1 is released.

    Source: Channel Web
     
  2. mysticjon New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    436 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Location:
    CA, USA
    oh wow...hope this problem doesn't drag out...at least an effort is being made/attempted, rather than releasing a partial workable code. hope they deliever on time :) ms seems to be doing marketing and business differently....they seem not to make a big deal over hack/pirated ms os and software
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2008
  3. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,461 (4.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,264
    i upgraded to SP1 yesterday and my system runs faster than it did before. and WAY faster than XP ran.
     
  4. TheGuruStud

    TheGuruStud

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,621 (0.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    168
    Location:
    Police/Nanny State of America


    Not only is that false due to the absolute fact that vista is slower than XP, even with 2+ gigs, but I actually installed vista w/ sp1 slipstreamed on my buddies PC. Yeah, it's still slow.

    And how did they delay it if it RTMed? I guess they'll fix the one for online updates, but what about its other problems?
     
    ChillyMyst says thanks.
  5. russianboy New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,800 (0.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    90
    Not BS.

    Vista has the tendency to either run fast or slow. It runs fine on 1 gig on my system.
     
  6. tkpenalty New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,958 (2.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    345
    Location:
    Australia, Sydney
    Agreed.

    In some cases such as accessing data, or executing programs, vista is MUCH faster however... the problem lays in the actual application performance.
     
  7. TheGuruStud

    TheGuruStud

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,621 (0.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    168
    Location:
    Police/Nanny State of America
    ROFL, I'm definitely not buying that one. I've used vista on multiple machines with 1 GB (then upgraded them to 2). 2 gigs is practically a must. I don't know about you, but I don't like having 0 MBs of ram free. Even for all of that caching it runs like shit b/c it pages the shit to load any app. I tried playing FEAR with 1 GB. It can't be done smoothly. Every freakin 15 sec or so you get 10 sec pauses while it loads more data. Runs fine in XP, of course. Then you have the pathetic performance of moving/copying/deleting files. I really like transferring files at 7 MBs a sec.

    It's fine for email and web browsing, other than that, it's completely unproductive due to perf. issues.
     
    ChillyMyst says thanks.
  8. mysticjon New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    436 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Location:
    CA, USA
    though i have 4gb of ram...vista 32-bit only reads over 3gb but still i like the extra boost and flexibility
     
  9. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    17,263 (5.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,600
    Location:
    Florida
    id have to agree...i used my buds rig with vista on it and it was mad slow......and he has similar specs to mine...at the time anyway....but when i ran it on my rig it flew....
     
  10. TheGuruStud

    TheGuruStud

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,621 (0.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    168
    Location:
    Police/Nanny State of America
    You can trick it to see the whole 4.

    Try:
    Open an elevated Command Prompt, type BCDEdit /set pae ForceEnable
    BCDEdit /set nx AlwaysOff & BCDEdit /set pae ForceEnable


    I can't find the link that I want, but google around. It's been out for a while.
     
  11. CrAsHnBuRnXp

    CrAsHnBuRnXp

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,530 (2.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    659
    I ran it fine with a single core A64 with 1GB RAM and a 6800GS (AGP). Had a 40GB hdd at the time too. Played most all my games fine. FEAR lagged, but that was the only game.

    My guess for things being incompatible is because they rewrote the Vista kernel in SP1. (So Ive read anyway)
     
  12. kylew

    kylew New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Messages:
    604 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    70
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Come on, Don't talk like that. Just because you've experienced it doesn't mean it's 100% fact that that's how it is. I personally haven't had those problems you list, and I've only had 1 things that refuses/refused to work and that's a third party issue. You may get a 7mb/s transfer but not everyone else will, I generally get 65-70mb/s when transferring files between my samsung HDDs. Maybe you get problems but what you see/get is what everyone else sees/gets. I personally like vista and I think it runs very well on my system, I have ran it on a few different configurations myself and haven't had any major problems, lowest spec system i tried it on was with a sempron 2800 with 512MB of ram. Vista ultimate ran at an acceptable level. Now I've got my current system, it more than flies. To me XP is stale and feels really dated. Anyway, just my input.

    edit: I've also got SP1 installed, and I've came across no issues yet *crosses fingers*
     
  13. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,461 (4.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,264

    lol at the BS flag. im telling you, ive run a bazillion benchmarks and vista sp1 runs faster than vista, and is faster than xp sp2 on my machine. i wouldnt make it up.
     
  14. mysticjon New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    436 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Location:
    CA, USA
    it reads all 4gb during p.o.s.t but i just did the pae enable thing im gunna reboot to see a difference
     
  15. WarEagleAU

    WarEagleAU Bird of Prey

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    10,797 (3.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    546
    Location:
    Gurley, AL
    Wow, thats pretty bad. I dont remember XP SP 2 (or was it SP1) being remotely as bad as this.
     
  16. Silverel

    Silverel New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,769 (0.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    Location:
    Detroit, MI
    Well, at least they've learned that transparency with serious problems can give you a little bit of credibility. Can you imagine how much worse it would be if it were fully released and all of this hit the fan?

    Kudos on not covering it up.
    Boo to your compatibility issues!
     
  17. Triprift

    Triprift

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    Messages:
    7,185 (2.86/day)
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Location:
    Adelaide Australia
    Vista runs fine on my system no probs and my machine aint exactly beasty.
     
  18. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,380 (11.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,683
    I really... REALLY need a direct download link to SP1 x64....

    i have several systems, so winupdating is a waste.


    Ram speed matters as much as amount of ram, in vista.
    I've had it running fine (not gaming) on 512MB, but that was 512MB of DDR 400 at 2-3-3-5 on a presler @ 4GHz.

    2GB of 800MHz ram is *my* minimum reccomendation, but only if gaming - if not gaming, 1GB does just fine.
     
  19. Triprift

    Triprift

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    Messages:
    7,185 (2.86/day)
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Location:
    Adelaide Australia
    gaming is fine ofcourse the 7600 means no kick arse res but oh well i can live with that.
     
  20. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,830 (1.75/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    I thought sp1 was released two days ago. I didn't search it out to download it, it was automatically streamed through windows update as they usually are when they are released, so....

    On the other note, vista runs absolutely great on my system. File transfer, gaming, browsing, generally everything I do on the computer is made better by vista. But thats just me. Haven't noticed any real difference w/ sp1, but maybe I will.
     
  21. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    When I ran Vista, I actually saw performance increases in some games. GRAW jumps to mind immediately. Others ran the same, and a couple did suffer losses, on the order of 2-5fps (from 80+). Hardly anything to write home about.
     
  22. ShadowXP New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    126 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Location:
    Larvik, Norway
    Both my systems are running stabile and are more responsive post-SP1 than they were before. Besides, I have absolutely NO clue about why people want to run software-based firewalls and ESPECIALLY Internet Security-packages on their computers. Get a hardware-based NAT-firewall (or a full-blows firewall) in the form of a broadband router, and save yourself the headache that comes with a software-firewall. I have yet to find one that DOESN'T turn your system into the computer equivalent of a stunned slug glued to a brick wall (i.e. slow).

    SP1 has not, as far as I know, been released to Windows Update yet. Word from the devs through the Microsoft Technet-community is that WU'ing of SP1 will take place in mid-march. It's been RTM'ed, which means that OEM-producers such as Dell, HP and others have gotten their hands on it. It can, however, be downloaded off Technet if you have a valid subscription. You should also be able to find it in the torrent-community, but I'd rather pluck out all my pubic hairs with a pair of tweezers one by one than installing a system update gotten through those means.
     
  23. ChillyMyst

    ChillyMyst New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Messages:
    551 (0.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    47
    i can name 4 software firewalls that dont hamper system performance.

    sygate pro(only good for 2k/xp/2k3 32bit

    black ice protection.

    kerio firewall.

    nod32's new 3.x security suit dosnt hamper system performance

    all of those have very little impact on performance, clearly your just talking out your ass OR your only experiance with software firewalls has bee norton and mcafee firewalls, and anything by symantic(norton) or mcafee is SHIT to begine with, horrible software, just fing horrible!!!!

    as to your pubic hair pulling, please dont let us know how you get your jollys........

    i have many a time gotten service packs beta and full via torrents, i use to have an msdn subscriotion BUT the problem was that when those servers came out, ms's servers would chug, slow as snot, cant count the number of times i went to torrents grabbed a torrent for the same thing i was downloading DIRRECTLY from ms, and the torrent finnished first.

    examples.

    windows 2003 server, i had msdn access via a company i was working for, it hit RTM, it was coming in at 63k max(remmber this very clearly, i was getting pissed), poped onto a torrent site, figuared what the hell and i looked, sure enought, torrent for RTM 2003 server msdn edition(no key included) and it was even a 3in1 job, so i grabbed it, it had like 7000 seeds and a tond of leechers/peers, it took my connection all the way to my capped limmit(750k out of 900 possable) and stayed there till the torrent finnished, to this day i have that disk around and use it to grab clean un tweaked un-updated copys of 2003 web/std/ent off of for diffrent jobs/installs im working on.

    i killed the ms download it was only 22% done when my torrent finnished.

    and b4 you ask, yes the torrent was clean, winbeta dosnt put out hacked up windows iso's, just clean ones with no mods other then multi versions on 2 disk(using a tool ms supplys for that very job!!!!)

    so dont bag on torrents for updates, sometimes its the best way to get them, or get a pre-updated disk, i have xp x64 here, my orignal disk no sp on it, you cant slipstream x64 windows using x32 windows, so i would have to install it un patched, slipstream and burn a new disk, then reinstall windows again(updating an installed copy is far less clean and reliable then installing a clean preupdated version) so when i desided to give x64 another shot, well i grabed a clean slipstreamed copy online(again didnt come with a key, just the disk image), i also tryed to get this via a buddys msdn account, the ms downloader they forced me to install was SLOW AS SNOT, 130k max.......kept droping tho.....in the end i had 2 copys and disscovered the ms version that was maked as sp2, wasnt slipstreamed, the version they had up came with the damn service pack on the disk so after you installed you could update to sp2(wtf...stupid ms......)

    blah, im not promoting piracy, im just saying don bag on torrents or other ways to get the files, since many times they are faster or more reliable then dirrect sorces like getting the file dirrectly from ms!!!

    btw, anybody know if ms really stoped using their downloader?, somebody told me they stoped using it again and that u can use other download resumers now....if so that would be a great thing for alot of us who cant stand that thing ms made.......*grummbles* damn ms...... love windows 2k/2k3/x64pro......hate the company behind it....
     
  24. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,830 (1.75/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Perhaps because I have an oem copy I got it? As I said on 2/20 I did receive sp1 through windows update. Or maybe they are doing a small release or something.
     
  25. ChillyMyst

    ChillyMyst New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Messages:
    551 (0.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    47
    from what i been seeing, it went up for a SHORT time on windows update, then got pulled because of the problems with some companys softwares.

    suprise suprise suprise, ms makes yet another bugged patch for vista.....
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page