Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

should i go to vista sp1?

Tags:
  • Windows Vista
  • Components
Last response: in Components
April 10, 2008 6:45:39 PM

has there been any big issues with this release? its been out for a couple weeks so i thought i would upgrade today

More about : vista sp1

April 10, 2008 7:11:10 PM

SP1 contains some good updates so its worth doing, although the majority of them you probably already have through Windows Update.

Be very careful before upgrading though. Make an Image of your system first or at least a System Restore Point. I 've had many, many failed SP1 installs on different platforms which leave the OS restarting or BSOD duirng boot.

Only way back is a system restore from booting the OS CD, rebuild or re-image if you have it ! :) 

Always backup first !!
April 10, 2008 7:25:23 PM

Yes install it, especially if you're using 64bit.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
April 10, 2008 7:37:15 PM

open the trunk, now, do it!
April 10, 2008 7:37:21 PM

Why?

Seriously, what will Vista give you that XP doesn't?
April 10, 2008 7:39:22 PM

snarfies1 said:
Why?

Seriously, what will Vista give you that XP doesn't?


Don't start that again.....
April 10, 2008 7:40:34 PM

snarfies1 said:
Why?

Seriously, what will Vista give you that XP doesn't?


A truckload of awesome.
April 10, 2008 7:42:13 PM

LOL i have vista, and i have done since its come out, and i have to say, its rubbish! i dont care to much for the glossy mac like interface, and most of the layout i have windows xp style, its also slower than xp, and less stable, so dunno why you would want or need it.

Just my opinion ^^^
April 10, 2008 7:45:50 PM

easy answer...dx10
April 10, 2008 7:46:05 PM

uk_gangsta said:
LOL i have vista, and i have done since its come out, and i have to say, its rubbish! i dont care to much for the glossy mac like interface, and most of the layout i have windows xp style, its also slower than xp, and less stable, so dunno why you would want or need it.

Just my opinion ^^^

take what you just said and make everything the oppositem and you have my experience. each to his own.

superfetch FTW
April 10, 2008 7:48:32 PM

I find vista to do some things quicker because of superfetch, and I haven't had vista crash on me once (besided Quake 4 locking up, but that happens in XP so it's a game issue not an o/s issue).

Bioshock looks great in Directx 10 too.
Anonymous
April 10, 2008 8:01:46 PM

I actually LOVE the new browsing/searching in Vista. Its SOOO much easier than XP, don't get me wrong XP wasn't hard, but Vista is just nicer and easier.

I still like XP and yes it usually has better frame rates than Vista, but if your system is pretty decent than Vista is also smokin for games.
April 10, 2008 8:26:19 PM

I like Vista and XP currently having one machine with each OS. They are both great systems. Back to the OP, I have not installed SP1 yet, but most of my friends have with no problems and it has helped resolve a few issues they had. I would vote, yes, install SP1.
April 10, 2008 8:26:46 PM

For everyone complaining how "slow" vista is.. GET WITH THE TIMES!!! Vista is desgined to take advantage of NEW hardware with multi-core systems and DX10 cards. If you're still whining that you lose 3 frames per second in Vista compared to XP, get new hardware and get ready for the future. EVERYONE hated XP when it came out and look at you fanboi's now. XP will someday be ancient history and your options will be Vista and Windows 7. When that happens you're going to say "I have windows 7!!! its slow shiny and new and slows down my comp! im staying with vista!!" You'll live and learn.
April 10, 2008 9:01:52 PM

Steven Bancroft said:
For everyone complaining how "slow" vista is.. GET WITH THE TIMES!!! Vista is desgined to take advantage of NEW hardware with multi-core systems and DX10 cards. If you're still whining that you lose 3 frames per second in Vista compared to XP, get new hardware and get ready for the future. EVERYONE hated XP when it came out and look at you fanboi's now. XP will someday be ancient history and your options will be Vista and Windows 7. When that happens you're going to say "I have windows 7!!! its slow shiny and new and slows down my comp! im staying with vista!!" You'll live and learn.


amen....
April 10, 2008 9:04:40 PM

Vista SP1 should not cause any problems. The only issues I have confirmed that actually happen as a result of the update are with sound. On certain sound card configurations you may have to reset the speaker configuration, and in the worst case reinstall the sound card driver.

Personally, I had no probs with mine, although I did update the sound card driver as recently as February, so it may just affect older sound card drivers.

Remember people, this poster ALREADY uses Vista. This shouldn't be another XP vs. Vista discussion.
April 10, 2008 9:20:01 PM

Stable.

Vista 64. Not a single OS failure. Ever.

Can't say that about XP when it came out.


Bug and viral free. I love not having to install antivirus just so I can visit my favorite Russian p_rn sites.
April 10, 2008 9:52:00 PM

I installed Vista 64 with SP1 on a new build just a few days ago. Not one single problem has cropped up so far. Its definitely different than my XP machine and it will take a bit getting used to, but I like it so far. Ok, there is one problem. Some of the print for the menus is a bit small for me to read easily, but that's more because of age and eye problems than anything else. I'll get the at adjusted during the next few days adn it will no longer be a problem.
April 10, 2008 10:25:10 PM

You can increase the DPI for fonts to make the text bigger you know. Go to your display properties and the option is in the left-side pane.

Anyway, back on topic, I've installed SP1 on both my Vista machines (32-bit and 64-bit) and it went very smooth and I would highly recommend it. Back off topic, does anyone know why 64-bit SP1 file is ~750MB while the 32-bit SP1 file is ~350MB?

April 10, 2008 10:45:07 PM

I would say no it's a complete waste of an hour. The only improvement that you will notice is with large file transfers and that can be applied separately. It's less not more compatibility with games at least in the 64bit.

Feedback from the user community and beta testers is generally negative with regard to SP1 or neutral. The problem is it didn't really do much of anything unless you have one of the issues that were addressed. Most of these issues weren't all that common.

I wont uninstall it but I wouldn't do it again either. The game issues I have had just aren't worth it to me to waste the time going back. The fact is if you're happy now you wont notice any improvement. In fact it will seem much slower because it will re-index all over again. Once completed other than the file copy fix which you may already have the no difference. When benchmarking is used there is a net slow down in performance that is statistical insignificant. Over all there is that much that needed to be fixed in the first place which is good.
April 10, 2008 11:06:22 PM

Yes, I have updated all three of my Vista machines to SP1, have had no issues.
April 10, 2008 11:16:47 PM

uk_gangsta said:
LOL i have vista, and i have done since its come out, and i have to say, its rubbish! i dont care to much for the glossy mac like interface, and most of the layout i have windows xp style, its also slower than xp, and less stable, so dunno why you would want or need it.

Just my opinion ^^^



Remember when Xp came out? People were saying that too about XP vs 98/ME but technology goes on. I remember my old p4 1.6ghz was soo fast in windows Millenium it would in fact shutdown in 1/4 seconds NO JOKE !! Xp was in the 1-2 minutes range. Games were also too slow for my tastes in xp but it brought dx9.0 to the game which gave something new to the gaming world unseen before.

Vista uses dx10 which is not a big deal now but it's future anyways. Also how come your vista is slow? Mine rocks like a F1. I removed half the services that started at boot, disabled file indexing, and I'm using readyboost with a super fast 8GB memory stick which loads my games much faster than before. Even the boot-up is faster. But you need to have a fast computer though, exactly as 98/ME vs XP did. Vista is also better at handling threads between cpus. Going vista is a must in my case. Some games don't work in vista so those poorly programmed games were tossed in the garbage.

*Edited some typos
April 11, 2008 8:22:23 AM

hotdogmichigan said:
Remember when Xp came out? People were saying that too about XP vs 98/ME but technology goes on. I remember my old p4 1.6ghz was soo fast in windows Millenium it would in fact shutdown in 1/4 seconds NO JOKE !! Xp was in the 1-2 minutes range. Games were also too slow for my tastes in xp but it brought dx9.0 to the game which gave something new to the gaming world unseen before.

Vista uses dx10 which is not a big deal now but it's future anyways. Also how come your vista is slow? Mine rocks like a F1. I removed half the services that started at boot, disabled file indexing, and I'm using readyboost with a super fast 8GB memory stick which loads my games much faster than before. Even the boot-up is faster. But you need to have a fast computer though, exactly as 98/ME vs XP did. Vista is also better at handling threads between cpus. Going vista is a must in my case. Some games don't work in vista so those poorly programmed games were tossed in the garbage.

*Edited some typos



To warrant saying XP is better than Vista or Vista is better than XP is like saying BMX is better than a Chopper....

Vista has had less issues in its first year than XP - oops

Vista is by no means the prefect OS and in its early stages there are a few issues and they are being delt with...

Most early problems were drivers and Nvidia has been better of late to update them....

XP is guaranteed compatability on all the old games front... Vista has issues with some games even if they run ( BF2142 anyone !!!)

I like Vista, it is better looking and smoother.. I will get better, it will get a SP2... Issues will be fixed which are outstanding, somethings are turned on by default.. I dont like the changes in the networking side. You have to turn it off.. No real games for it yet " Vista Only games " was a failure only one being really Halo 2.. Extra features on FS 10 but the rest has been slight to say the least.

But it is the future, XP stops being shipped next year January I think.

But SP1 has improved perfomance and is stable, i have installed it on many Vista pcs and its worth it...
April 11, 2008 9:08:56 AM

snarfies1 said:
Why?

Seriously, what will Vista give you that XP doesn't?


DX10 features in games. Right now, it's not a major thing, since the only DX10 game I'm playing is LOTR Online, which has a DX10 patch, but at least I can say I'm getting my money's worth with Vista and a 3870x2 (well almost, LOTR Online has issues with both Crossfire and SLI).

Can't wait for DX10 native CRPGs to arrive. Also, more dual GPU support in games would be nice.

As per the thread, I had no issues with updating to Vista SP1. I'm even using a PCI RAID card for a couple of legacy IDE drives that has only engineering drivers for Vista, still have no issues (as the card manufacturer's programmers did a good job). Maybe I've just been lucky?

bydesign said:
I wont uninstall it but I wouldn't do it again either. The game issues I have had just aren't worth it to me to waste the time going back.


I'd say your problems are with 64 bit Vista, not SP1 in particular. I'd thought of updating, but I mostly play games and have heard horror stories about both 64 bit Windows and games. When game support is good on 64 bit, then I'll go for it, but I suspect that 64 bit won't work out for gamers until "Windows 7" or whatever it's called.

Though I haven't had bad Vista experiences, my wife didn't like it and wanted to go back to XP. Perhaps Vista will be known as "Son of Windows ME" or "Windows ME Too". Let's hope the next OS is good.

Some of the features touted by Microsoft drone executives for their next OS just don't work for me, like touch screen capabilities etc. Sort of reminds me of the article I read years ago where a Microsoft exec claimed that no one wanted to spend much time on the net, that people just wanted to find things fast, like airline schedules, and then get off. He claimed that nobody read or watch video all that much.

Though this was back in the 56k modem days and way before Youtube, I was reading as much on the net as off. The Gutenberg project and other university sites provide a wealth of material, especially for wannabee medievalists and lovers of folklore and fantasy like me. That exec thought that what he wanted to do was what everyone else wanted.

That's the problem of "one size fits all" visions, the kind that Microsoft has been known for since Windows 95. I don't assume everyone's like me. Bill Gates and company assume everyone else is like them.
April 11, 2008 5:49:01 PM

jampack714 said:
has there been any big issues with this release? its been out for a couple weeks so i thought i would upgrade today

From what I can tell, SP1 is better in every way. Also more stable. Never needed to reboot since I installed it.
April 11, 2008 6:25:48 PM

i just setup a buddies new pc that has sp1 installed already and i just love it (but that's prob because i set it up! LOL) and that's over my xp pro!

i'm planning on going with vista 64bit sometime next month. sad to see some people out there that are unwilling to change. like some people who have had xp for years now and still will only use the windows 2000 skin. is the xp skin so bad? i'll bet they will want to stay with that old skin when windows 7 comes out!
April 11, 2008 6:52:07 PM

Steven Bancroft said:
For everyone complaining how "slow" vista is.. GET WITH THE TIMES!!! Vista is desgined to take advantage of NEW hardware with multi-core systems and DX10 cards. If you're still whining that you lose 3 frames per second in Vista compared to XP, get new hardware and get ready for the future. EVERYONE hated XP when it came out and look at you fanboi's now. XP will someday be ancient history and your options will be Vista and Windows 7. When that happens you're going to say "I have windows 7!!! its slow shiny and new and slows down my comp! im staying with vista!!" You'll live and learn.


Sooooooo True!!!!

I'm still waiting to go to SP1, but I might give it a try shortly. Right now I'm too busy playing/enjoying Crysis tough.

Apparently it's not a huge step up, but it's still worth it.
April 11, 2008 7:23:31 PM

I'll agree that 32-bit Vista is rubbish in comparison to XP. If you're running less than 2 GB of RAM on your 32-bit Vista machine, it probably will run like crap unless you vLite it and/or turn off every service under the sun.

The tides turn the other way with 64-bit.

64-bit XP (which is really a crippled Server 2003 x64) seems to have very little support (drivers, especially). Hell, if you have a problem with XP x64, Microsoft passes the buck onto the OEM...because that's all that XP x64 is available as...that and volume licensing. Vista x64 support is growing, and 32-bit viruses don't affect it (unless the virus can thunk through wow6432...)

I also use Media Center. There is no XP Media Center Edition x64.

So:
64-bit Vista + 8 GB of RAM + Media Center = nice!
Vista search = WIN!
Vista address bar = WIN!
Sidebar = okay (nice to have, but bloated on resources)
WinPE 2.0/2.1 = WIN!
Copying files pre-SP1 = UGH!
Copying files post-SP1 = okay
Vista bootloader (bcd) = ........ (a pain in my sack compared to ntldr/boot.ini, but easy to repair if something goes foobar)
Slipstreaming= UGH! (no excuse for not being able to slipstream SP1 without a reverse install)
Vista backup = ....... (needs more options, but otherwise image based backups are win)
Default shutdown button being "Sleep" = someone was on crack and/or was trying to hide problems with slow boot-up. Speaking of which...
Boot up speed = iffy (I think Superfetch is doing its thing and taking its sweet ass time)
Superfetch = crap on boot, deh secks afterward (make sure you have the RAM for it, though)
Ready-boost = not worth it
Windows Mobile Device Center = would be great if it wasn't buggy as hell
No NetMeeting = phail!
User Account Control = intentions were good, but counterproductive (average joes will just click "Allow" all the time, techies will just turn it off altogether)
Networking = again, good intentions, but more clicks to get where you need to go = not good.
Aero = okay if you have the hardware
3d Flip = WIN!

April 11, 2008 7:45:49 PM

Insatlled SP 1 last night. No issues.
April 11, 2008 10:30:46 PM

@ the OP,

I have had a positive experience with SP1 and Vista home premium 32 bit.
June 28, 2008 7:26:18 PM

The OP has Vista.

No discussion of XP is appropriate.



Yes, upgrade to Vista SP1. The resource requirement (startup RAM) is slightly less than standard Vista, maybe on the order of 3-4%. A couple functions, such as file transfers, seem slightly crisper/quicker.


I am running Vista64 SP1 on a Q6600 with 8GB of RAM.