38,028
Windows Vista for XP ProfessionalsUpdating Support Skills from XP to Vistaby Bink.nu's Raymond Comvalius
There are 84 guest(s) online.
There are 1 member(s) online.
Will Vista SP1 and how this won’t bring any relief to those who find Vista a bit slow or sluggish? Not really, but then again service packs aren’t about performance increases; they’re about reliability and stability.
I’ve seen a lot of service packs in my time. Windows 95 and ME both got one service pack, NT 4.0 saw six, Windows 2000 had four and XP has so far seen two. But what I don’t remember regarding any of these service packs is installing it onto a system and then seeing any significant boost in performance. Service packs don’t really work that way. Sure, you’ll feel specific improvements as a result of some of the tweaks and fixes contained in the service pack, and you might feel the benefit of having your operating system refreshed by loading the service pack onto it, but a service pack should not be looked upon as a performance upgrade. If your system can’t run an OS, what it needs is upgrading or replacing, not the application of a service pack.
With Windows Vista SP1 on the horizon it’s time to cut through the hyperbole, speculation and myth and get down to reality. Now that Microsoft has released a preview of the release candidate of SP1 we no longer need to make wild guesses. By marking this preview as a release candidate we know that barring any last minute bug fixes, this is what SP1 will look and feel like when it’s finally released.
I’ve been running Vista SP1 on a number of non-critical systems now since it was made available and overall I’ve been very pleased with it. I’ve been running Vista since the day that it went RTM over a year ago and since then the operating system has matured greatly, not only as a result of hardware vendors releasing better drivers, but also because Microsoft has been drip-feeding users updates designed to improves stability, reliability and performance. These updates will be rolled into SP1, which means that those who have been keeping up with will already be benefiting from them, while those that haven’t and who are waiting for SP1, they’ll see the benefits after installing the service pack.
Continue At Source
Officially, there was no service pack for Windows 98 or ME as far as I can remember.... or even search for at the present time. Now.... unofficially, yeah. There's been some good folk out there that took the time to roll-up all the patch releases for both operating systems and offered them as an unofficial SP download. Along with four different versions of Windows 95, I'd say there was a vast improvement between them. (most people didn't get a chance to see Windows 95D since it was a closed version)
As we can see from the forums, not all of Vista's SP1 patches released before the pack are having good results. More than not however, the patches that have been released have had great results leaving Vista a lot more stable then it was when I installed it in February this year.
But..... you're right. Unless the SP was specifically designed to improve on the code of OS, "overall performance" is not what they are intended to do. Besides... I've seen a dramatic change in what the true definition of performance has become. It's starting to drift away from what it really means... into smaller, not so true, individual visions.
An operating systems performance level is based on the entire system. Not just any one particular part.
win98se was originally supposed to be service pack for win98, but after awhile the service pack became too big so they made it an upgrade.
-gosh