Have updates all along "negated" SP1?

There's a lot about Vista SP1 in the news these days. Now, I've been
getting automatic updates since I have had Vista. Do I need to even pay
attention to SP1, or have the periodic updates taken care of everything?

SP1 contains all the updates you currently have downloaded from Windows
Update 'plus' many more enhancements that have not been offered, so No the
periodic updates have not taken care of 'everything' and Yes SP1 is an
important update well worth installing.

If you have windows update enabled you will automatically be offered SP1
once it is officially released to the Update site. Obviously, because your
PC is 'up to date' with all current updates the remainder of the service
pack shouldn't be too large for download.

--
--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..



"Ernie Lane" <> wrote in message
news:ZyEsj.291$ph.87@trnddc06...
> There's a lot about Vista SP1 in the news these days. Now, I've been
> getting automatic updates since I have had Vista. Do I need to even pay
> attention to SP1, or have the periodic updates taken care of everything?

Just as Vista updates have done nothing to rectify Vista's major inherent
flaws, slowness and incompatibility with many programs, SP1 does nothing
tangible. Peripheral vendors are still not writing drivers for Vista that
are as reliable or full featured as their XP counterparts.

flambe wrote:

> Just as Vista updates have done nothing to rectify Vista's major inherent
> flaws, slowness and incompatibility with many programs, SP1 does nothing
> tangible. Peripheral vendors are still not writing drivers for Vista that
> are as reliable or full featured as their XP counterparts.
>
>
Liar!
Frank

Program and driver compatibility are the responsibility of the individual
vendor 'not' Microsoft. These vendors have had ample opportunity to update
their software and drivers to run on Vista but have obviously chosen not to.
Again that is their responsibility, not Microsoft. As much as everyone seems
to think Microsoft is all powerful, it, as a company, cannot make anyone do
anything they don't want to. If you believe that they can then you must be
living in cloud cuckoo land.

As for slowness, SP1 has actually, according to many users who have
installed the RC beta, increased performance, rather than decreased it.


--
--
John Barnett MVP
Associate Expert
Windows - Shell/User

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..



"flambe" <> wrote in message
news:l1Fsj.248$. ..
> Just as Vista updates have done nothing to rectify Vista's major inherent
> flaws, slowness and incompatibility with many programs, SP1 does nothing
> tangible. Peripheral vendors are still not writing drivers for Vista that
> are as reliable or full featured as their XP counterparts.
>
>

John Barnett MVP wrote:
> Program and driver compatibility are the responsibility of the
> individual vendor 'not' Microsoft. These vendors have had ample
> opportunity to update their software and drivers to run on Vista but
> have obviously chosen not to. Again that is their responsibility, not
> Microsoft. As much as everyone seems to think Microsoft is all powerful,
> it, as a company, cannot make anyone do anything they don't want to. If
> you believe that they can then you must be living in cloud cuckoo land.
>
> As for slowness, SP1 has actually, according to many users who have
> installed the RC beta, increased performance, rather than decreased it.
>
>

All the more reason, if you opt for Vista, to wait until after SP2
(which is when Vista will really be out of beta). The "vendors" need to
update their software and drivers and Redmond needs to update Vista.
Neither are ready for prime time but that won't stop MS from pushing it
out and laughing all the way to the bank. After all, they have millions
of beta testers that actually pay MS to test. Good scam.

Alias

Alias wrote:
> John Barnett MVP wrote:
>
>> Program and driver compatibility are the responsibility of the
>> individual vendor 'not' Microsoft. These vendors have had ample
>> opportunity to update their software and drivers to run on Vista but
>> have obviously chosen not to. Again that is their responsibility, not
>> Microsoft. As much as everyone seems to think Microsoft is all
>> powerful, it, as a company, cannot make anyone do anything they don't
>> want to. If you believe that they can then you must be living in cloud
>> cuckoo land.
>>
>> As for slowness, SP1 has actually, according to many users who have
>> installed the RC beta, increased performance, rather than decreased it.
>>
>>
>
> All the more reason, if you opt for Vista, to wait until after SP2
> (which is when Vista will really be out of beta).

Liar!

The "vendors" need to
> update their software and drivers and Redmond needs to update Vista.

Liar!

> Neither are ready for prime time but that won't stop MS from pushing it
> out and laughing all the way to the bank.

Liar!

After all, they have millions
> of beta testers that actually pay MS to test.

Liar!

Good scam.

Liar!
>
> Alias, the fukkin jealoys, lying linux spamming bigoted troll.
Frank

"Alias" <> wrote in message news:fovgl7$vqo$...
> John Barnett MVP wrote:
>> Program and driver compatibility are the responsibility of the individual
>> vendor 'not' Microsoft. These vendors have had ample opportunity to
>> update their software and drivers to run on Vista but have obviously
>> chosen not to. Again that is their responsibility, not Microsoft. As much
>> as everyone seems to think Microsoft is all powerful, it, as a company,
>> cannot make anyone do anything they don't want to. If you believe that
>> they can then you must be living in cloud cuckoo land.
>>
>> As for slowness, SP1 has actually, according to many users who have
>> installed the RC beta, increased performance, rather than decreased it.
>>
>>
>
> All the more reason, if you opt for Vista, to wait until after SP2 (which
> is when Vista will really be out of beta). The "vendors" need to update
> their software and drivers and Redmond needs to update Vista. Neither are
> ready for prime time but that won't stop MS from pushing it out and
> laughing all the way to the bank. After all, they have millions of beta
> testers that actually pay MS to test. Good scam.

You really have no idea what you're talking about

Service Pack One Is not Yet Available To The General Public (Unless You Use
The Microsoft Beta Tester Windows Registry Hack, And Even Then It Still
Might Not Work, Let's Put it This Way: It Did not Work For Me, When I Tried
It On Monday Night), Just FYI. Your Best Bet Is To Wait Until It Becomes
Available To The General Public Sometime In Mid-March, Also Just FYI.

"Ernie Lane" <> wrote in message
news:ZyEsj.291$ph.87@trnddc06...
> There's a lot about Vista SP1 in the news these days. Now, I've been
> getting automatic updates since I have had Vista. Do I need to even pay
> attention to SP1, or have the periodic updates taken care of everything?

Brian W wrote:
>
> "Alias" <> wrote in message
> news:fovgl7$vqo$...
>> John Barnett MVP wrote:
>>> Program and driver compatibility are the responsibility of the
>>> individual vendor 'not' Microsoft. These vendors have had ample
>>> opportunity to update their software and drivers to run on Vista but
>>> have obviously chosen not to. Again that is their responsibility, not
>>> Microsoft. As much as everyone seems to think Microsoft is all
>>> powerful, it, as a company, cannot make anyone do anything they don't
>>> want to. If you believe that they can then you must be living in
>>> cloud cuckoo land.
>>>
>>> As for slowness, SP1 has actually, according to many users who have
>>> installed the RC beta, increased performance, rather than decreased it.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> All the more reason, if you opt for Vista, to wait until after SP2
>> (which is when Vista will really be out of beta). The "vendors" need
>> to update their software and drivers and Redmond needs to update
>> Vista. Neither are ready for prime time but that won't stop MS from
>> pushing it out and laughing all the way to the bank. After all, they
>> have millions of beta testers that actually pay MS to test. Good scam.
>
> You really have no idea what you're talking about
>
>

Really? How so? XP wasn't ready for prime time until SP2. Me was never
ready. 98 wasn't ready until 98SE. It's a pattern. The first idiots like
Frank who have to have the latest OS from Redmond are Redmond's "final
testers".

Alias