Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 8 Jun 2010.
Great! The sooner SP1 comes out, the sooner corporate users will jump on board, and we can start to see the end of IE6. (Corporate users being the mainstay of that senile browser).
The sad thing is that Windows 7 was ready for corporates from day 1, but corporates will generally always follow the mantra not to install a new OS prior to SP1, so MS has had to push out a SP as a cosmetic gesture to placate the corporates, when in fact it wasn't really necessary.
I guess you could say MS has made a rod for its own back in this respect - if previous versions of Windows had been as reliable, secure and bug-free out of the box as Windows 7, the "don't buy before SP1" attitude among corporates would probably never have arisen, or at least not to the extent it has.
Senile! What a fantastic descriptor for IE6. I'm going to steal that one.
Why release a service pack of all the released updates, that everyone with a connection to Internet has installed already, and bring it as big news and as a beta? So all the updates that I have installed are all beta's?
Ooh I see it is for convincing the cooperate businesses to install windows 7...
if they fix many of the networking bugs with this SP, corporate businesses will definitely make the leap of faith...
I don't get that either. If the service pack really is just a rollup of all the Windows Update patches to date, what's to beta test?
There's more changes/additions for Server 2008 R2, like RD RemoteFX. However, since 7 and R2 are basically one and the same, they are releasing the SP for 7 as well. There are a few under-the-hood tweaks too which haven't been released as Windows Updates, but there are very few. I've been running the leaked SP1 and tbh I can't really tell the difference. Might try it with an R2 install after my exams.
Nope, buy no microsoft product before it's SP1
With Microsoft, SP2 is Gold, SP1 is Public Beta, release is Beta, and Beta is Alpha
Another reason for SP1 to basically just incorporate all the old updates is that corporate environments (as mentioned above) typically don't update often (hence the IE6) and thus won't have many, if any, updates installed if they were running Win7.
Thus, with Win7 + SP1 they can either go from Win7 + 0 --> Win7 + SP1 have a uniform update status across the environment, or buy into Win7 now and instantly be up-to-date and uniform across the board (until SP2 is released).
wasnt widows 7 = vista sp
oh and there is no excuse for running the eminantly hackable (but fun) ie6
We've just started running Win7 here, but at 50 odd users we're hardly corporate. Mind you, we avoided Vista like the plague.
I don't know about other sys admins, but my users are all up to date, because I'm running a WSUS server (turns out that M$ make some bloody fantastic business products, who knew?).
Yup, this is essentially Vista SP4 now. I'm wondering if this one will have a £100-£200 price tag as well...
They've always managed to quietly hide away the good stuff under a camouflage net of mediocrity, and about two dozen wholly unrelated websites.
WSUS sounds like an absolute god send, to be able to centrally download, review, and apply Windows updates sounds a far better option than the alternatives of, just not doing them, updating each machine manually, or just letting the updates happen.
Having service pack one so "soon" after release isn't really a massive problem, having it go though beta in, say, companies who have been previously been holding back from upgrading. Is a good thing as it could be used to address issues which have been making them hold back thus far, barring the inevitable issues of budget, or the simple incompatibility of bespoke systems.
XP is dead! IE is for people who do not know better.
I am looking forward to this SP 1 not because I am waiting for MS to get it right but because it will bring luddites who subscribe to the "wait for sp1" into Win7, and therefore move computer gaming forward.
Win7 and Firefox are your friends, embrace them!
you mean something that would knock my ping of 101 in Counter Strike Source down to what it should considering im running a 40/5 internet connection and hardware that should run Crysis 2 at least on high?
Honestly, I'm still using WinXP Pro.
Windows 7 doesn't offer anything that would make my system better in any way and aslong as M$ doesn't release a magical service pack for Windows 7, that will make it use less ressources then my dusty WinXP Pro I've no intent of buying it.
After booting my WinXP Pro has 28 processes running while using some 280 MB of RAM. If Win7 doesn't come close to this, I rather wait to buy a new OS until there's no possibility to go with WinXP Pro anymore.
Oh yeah... Win7 has DirectX 10 and 11 right? Show me real software (not games!) that makes any good use of it, then it might be an argument.
Seriously... M$ hasn't managed to release a better OS since WinXP or made any useful improvements besides DX10 or 11... and they could've released DX10 and 11 aswell for XP if they wanted to.
If M$ wants some money again from me, then they need to do much better then what they did for the last 8 years.
But it's not only M$, that doesn't release any real improved software or OS for the last years... Adobe CS3 was the last thing I bought (upgraded to it from PS7, and Macromedia MX, after Adobe bought Macromedia and incorporated all roducts in one package), Apple didn't release any real improvements of MacOS after version 10.2, when the introduced Quartz-technology etc etc etc...
The only software that seems to really have improved over the last 5 years is the WebBrowsers and media-players, but anything else... meh.
I have a feeling that SP1 will mandate WAT. Bollard.
The RAM usage argument is generally laughable at best. If XP works fine for you and you see no usability or productivity improvements then thats fine. Moaning about RAM usage is just stupid. If the RAM isn't being used then you are slowing down the computer anyway by not loading things into the RAM.
Separate names with a comma.