THE SP1 Poll

[dx2]

Every post I read about SP1 has someone moaning about it failing on them. Personally I installed it fine...even with a circuit breaker going out in the middle of the install and powering down my whole system.

Did SP1 Installation work for you?

Yes Or No.

If the majority is yes...lets post trouble shooting follow ups so those unfortunate few that had the install fail can get SP1 up and going. :o

Cheers

[elektronisch]

Mmmmm, this should be a sticky.

[sumofatguy]

I don't think 5 votes is QUITE enough to come to that conclusion...

[dgingeri]

Since we can't respond for multiple machines: So far, I've installed it on 3 machines, one of them virtual, and they have installed just fine.

[GJSNeptune]

When I get home, I'm gonna boot into Vista and update. Anyone here who installed SP1 using Business 32-bit?

[Mister Natural]

Wasn't showing up via windows update yet so I used the standalone installer on my work rig which is Vista Ultimate 32 bit, 3.4gz Intel dual core and 2 gig of ram.

Took around 50 minutes to install. No problems to report.

[:LJ:]

Think you might need to add another option:

"Installed fine, deactivated itself, spent 30 minutes on the phone to some dude in India trying to convince him I really had paid for my OS."

[dx2]

For those that failed...

did you eventually get it resolved? If so what steps did you take or was it just a full blown wipe and reinstall.

[GJSNeptune]

Installed in about 36 minutes. No issues so far.

[Pappy]

Worked perfectly for me :) I have yet to see a performance increase/decrease using SP1.

[Tantrix]

I found a workaround to my SP1 problem, although it requires access to a system that will install SP1 with no errors. All of my systems are x86. Here's the error and how I got around it:

When unpacking, the .exe hangs at 50%, then gives this error:

An internal error occurred while installing the service pack

Error Code 0x8007000D

see http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=101139


I was getting this error on 2 different systems (desktop and laptop) and found out that for some reason the SP1 installer would not unpack the main .cab file correctly, making it corrupt. However, on my 3rd system (a desktop) the installer unpacked perfectly so I took advantage of it.

When you run the SP1 installer, it creates 2 temporary directories on your system partition, one containing various smaller files, and the other containing only the .cab files. If you have access to a system that can install SP1 correctly, run the installer and when the 2 temporary folders are created copy & paste both of the temp folders to another location so you can access them later.

Inside the folder with the .cab files, there will be the main one with the name:

windows6.0-kb936330-X86.cab

If you right click on it and hit properties, it should be 445,745, 776 bytes (x86 version). If you have WinRAR, open it and hit the test button. It should test clean and say no errors found. On my 2 machines that wouldn't decompress correctly, the windows6.0-kb936330-X86.cab was corrupt according to WinRAR.

Definitely a weird problem.

[MajorDomo]

I installed it this morning on four computers simultaneously...

Vista Home Premium OEM 32 bit

Vista Home Premium Retail 32 bit

Vista Home Premium Retail 64 bit

Vista Ultimate Retail 64 bit

downloaded in a flash and installed without a hiccup. I was impressed all to hell. So far I can see no overt changes or improvements, but nothing screwed up either. I call that a successful installation. :cool:

[XBarbarian]

ya. Installed fine. but can't say I see any real difference. not that I benchmarked before and after etc... seems as stable as ever I reckon

[Eva_Unit_0]

wow does it seriously take 30-60 minutes to install? good god! I mean, if it installs cleanly and brings nice improvements then hey whatever, I guess it doesn't matter. But that is a long-ass time for one install.

[Skillz'n Magic]

It worked on two computers for me. On my workstation it worked like a charm. File transfers are noticeably faster, yet still slow.

I installed in on the wife's laptop and it reduced boot up time by about 30%. It's a dual core 1.5Ghz core duo with 1GB of RAM. It's still slow to boot, but not quite as much. I think the RAM and the slower HDD in it are what's really inhibiting it.

[YeuEmMaiMai]

installed it on my desktop (X64 ultimate) and my laptop (x32 Home Premium) and took about 30 mins each machine

[pxc]

wow does it seriously take 30-60 minutes to install? good god! I mean, if it installs cleanly and brings nice improvements then hey whatever, I guess it doesn't matter. But that is a long-ass time for one install.How long does it take to upgrade Ubuntu installations?

I remember it took my brother's A64 system over an hour last time he jumped to a new version. Too bad it didn't install "cleanly," but it did bring a couple of small improvements. Is that "whatever" worthy? :rolleyes:

[AMD_RULES]

Installed standalone on the rig in sig successfully last night.
Windows Vista Ultimate X64

[Eagle923]

I installed it last night on two computers. One on Vista 32bit through the stand alone and the other on Vista 64bit through Windows Update (both Home Premium).

Both work fine, no real changes noticed. Although both computers were up-to-date with auto updates anyways, so no changes should have been noticed...

[Nenu]

the only options for failure are:
"
No, it was tripped up somewhere for unknown reasons and I'm stuck rebooting
No, it just didnt work and I know the cause.
"

you need another option for
No, it just didnt work and I "dont" know the cause.

[Eva_Unit_0]

How long does it take to upgrade Ubuntu installations?

I remember it took my brother's A64 system over an hour last time he jumped to a new version. Too bad it didn't install "cleanly," but it did bring a couple of small improvements. Is that "whatever" worthy? :rolleyes:

holy passive-aggressive, batman. I wasn't saying that it was a bad thing for the install to take so long, I said that it's worth it as long as the service pack does what it is supposed to do. Which apparently it does.

And I have no idea how long it takes to upgrade ubuntu, I've never used it. Upgrading gentoo, however, can take anywhere from 30 seconds to several hours depending on how long its been since the last update and if any huge packages need to be compiled.

[pxc]

holy passive-aggressive, batman. Holy lonely bridge you're missed from under, batman!

:rolleyes:

[JustLong]

I updated my laptop, Wife's PC, Media Center, and work PC to SP1 with no issues.
I did a clean install of SP1 slipstream on my gaming machine.

I can now copy files between all my vista PCs at gigabit speeds (~50MB/sec vs ~14MB/sec)

[pxc]

Drive to drive copies are about 30% faster now, without the annoying calculating step. That and the fixed hibernation are almost worth the update alone for me.

I finished updating my 3 Vista systems today without any problems.

[Lt.Col.Dehler]

mine did not work it got stuck with an error.
Error is:
0x80070002

[Eva_Unit_0]

Holy lonely bridge you're missed from under, batman!

:rolleyes:

ohhhhhh I get it, you're saying that I'm a troll! That sure was crafty!

I wasn't trolling lol I was asking an honest question about how long sp1 takes to install, since I have no vista boxes to test it out on myself. I didn't know that was considered trolling in these parts. :)

[Tweakin]

My tally thus far is;

Vista Premium x86 [OK]
Vista Business x86 [OK]
Vista Ultimate x64 [OK]

All using the standalone installer, two were fresh installs (the Business version was not).

The only major difference I have noticed is significant increase in network speed, which is great as it's been my biggest complaint against Vista.

The couple Vista laptops we had at work were dog slow on the network with a Linux file server- where as all Linux and XP based workstations were speedy (difference of <1mb as opposed to ~7mb / sec). I noticed the same problem on my home network with a Linux file server, as well as general XP file shares, transfering to my Vista Ultimate gaming rig.

So far, network speed is much better, but still not quite on par with all other computers.

Additionally the speed of transferring files across physical disks in the same machine and uncompressing archives seems to have increased. Though they had seemed to increase earlier in the year with some other patches (though I had never researched that).

All and all successful. I am still not a big Vista fan though, the direction just isn't what I had hoped for since the early Longhorn days ;)

[Eva_Unit_0]

All and all successful. I am still not a big Vista fan though, the direction just isn't what I had hoped for since the early Longhorn days ;)

agreed, winfs looked like it was made of 100% awesome :(