I don't have it on WU (can't tell why; I thought it was my Realtek drivers, but they are at the most recent available version), so I downloaded the full installer. Took about 2 hours of system updating, but somewhere around 100% of step 3 of 3, it said the installation failed and took another hour to rollback. My error code was something like 0x80005003 (have it written down at home), but I couldn't figure out what the underlying error that was.

I have also had successful installs of Vista SP1 on three machines:

* Generic machine with Vista Enterprise 32-Bit - Installed SP1 flawlessly.
* Dell Dimension 8300 with Vista Ultimate 32-Bit - Installed without any problems.
* Acer Ferrari 5000 with Vista Ultimate 64-Bit - also installed SP1 without any problems.

Family members have also had successful installs of the operating system:
Dell Inspiron 640m with Vista Business 32-Bit - Installed the update without any problems and has actually seen an increase in performance especially in areas such as File/Copying operations over his his network.

My other brother who recently bought his first laptop is also running with SP1 installed.
* Dell Inspiron 1420 with Vista Home Basic 32-Bit, no problems at all and these two systems in particular installed SP1 over a wireless connection including the Acer with Vista Ultimate 64-Bit.

So trying to make your friends story seem like the general conclusion of how unsuccessful SP1 for Vista has been for most users is wrong. Its just a blip. Don't get me wrong Joe, there are users out there who will come across unexpected failures because of changes to the kernel with SP1. Remember SP1 is basically Server 2008's cousin, actually they are 80% related, so changes that have occurred throughout its development are certain to affect some device drivers and application compatibility on the client side. Personally I have not encountered it.

Microsoft is aware this can happen and has done the right thing providing free technical support to customers and the intelligence of Windows Update will continue to improve the installation experience for many users.

I would recommend your friend disable any antivirus or antispyware utilities before trying install SP1, try downloading in another account, unplug any hardware devices from the system such as printers or scanners before attempting the installation. Otherwise he could simply download the Service Pack itself and do a manual install instead of going through Windows Update. Trust me Joe, there are many options available.

I am sure users of platforms such as OS X, had their fair share of problems too. I remember reading reports on forums such as Macrumors, users described problems booting their system after trying to install 10.4.10 or even Leopars 10.5.1.

Been testing Vista SP1 from their beta releases and I have had very few failures. May be because I dont have any problematic hardware?? But, keeping aside that, Vista SP1 is a must have update and I would prefer Vista SP1 slipstream installation rather than an upgrade. My personal experience has proved to me that Vista SP1 slipstream installation is so much better than what you may get from an Vista SP1 standalone upgrade. I have helped few of my friends here with SP1 installation from WU with Vista Home Premium and everyone were able to get it & install it without any issues.

I have 2 MacBook Pros at home and each uses Bootcamp to dual-boot OS X and Vista. On the first - SP1 (from Windows Update) worked flawlessly. On the other, Windows Update hung 3 times during download and twice during installation. I rebooted and retried in each case - never deleting any files in between. Fortunately after installation both made it through the 3 phase start-up thingy without any issues.

I don't understand why MS seems to overcomplicate everything. The major Mac system updates I've done in the past and kernel updates on my Ubuntu PC always seem to happen in less than half the time than Windows OS service packs and with one reboot. Pathetic really...

Installed it 1 or 2 weeks ahead of sched, through windows update without the 12/19/07 update (that caused a black screen), 65-70 mbs installed fine.
Didn't wipe out ubuntu dual boot

Didn't make backups, should have but its faster

don't use vista very much because of some of the changes they made and a few bugs, but never had a problem installing any release of sp1 during the tech beta or afterwards. i just don't really like vista, but have had no problems installing sp1.

I love anecdotal evidence. Its the weapon of the weak.

So the problem that Scot experienced has little to do with the SP1 itself, since he can't download it.
Has he tried to download the stand alone SP1 package and install it?

Vista is bloatware XP was about 0.75GB on one CD but Vista is more than 3GB on a DVD; more than 4 times the weight. I hate to think how big the next major release will be.

It is about time that Microsoft started thinking about how they could make it modular; kernel for all but the other bits selectable according to user needs.

XP does all I need so I am not choking up my system with Vista bloat until XP is unable to do what I want to do. I guess peripheral makers will have more say about that than Microsoft so I just hope my current printer and scanner keep working because I don't want to be driven to Vista by companies that refuse to continue to make XP drivers for their new products.

Bernie, your attitude reminds me of the legions of COBOL programmers years ago. They didn't progress... and ultimately whithered on the vine. Unfortunately, thats where the analogy ends, as you wont even have a time of extreme prosperity like they did with Y2K.

uhura :wrote

Bernie, your attitude reminds me of the legions of COBOL programmers years ago. They didn't progress... and ultimately whithered on the vine.
----------------------------------------------------

Vista could never be considered progress ask any professional IT person who is not in the pocket of MSFT. Vista is not progress when 75% of the worlds computers cannot even run it properly. Vista is not progress when a good portion of the IT World will wait until the release of Windows 7.

Vista is not progress when you have to buy a new printer because Vista does not support your current one. Vista is not progress when Apple has grown much more than anytime since Vista was released.

Vista is not progress when people are installing XP on their new computers because Vista is too slow and buggy for their tastes. Vista is not progress when it spies on its users 30 times a second.

Vista is not progress when Microsoft can revoke your drivers and hardware and could make your computer useless. Vista is not progress with the threat of "reduced functionality mode". Vista is not progress when within the year of it being released more and more government entities are moving to open source namely Linux.

Vista is not progress because MSFT admitted it by extending Windows XP to June 30 2008 and no doubt will extend it again. Vista is not progress when EePc is slated to install Windows XP HOME on Three Million of its laptops within the next couple of years.

Vista is not progress when there is already buzz and excitement for Windows 7. Vista is not progress when you can still buy brand new XP PRO machines. Lastly ...Vista is not progress when you can get "downgrade rights" to XP PRO for Vista Business and Vista Ultimate users....and that alone speaks volumes.

I have SP1 installed on three machines at home and all work well. The only problem I had is that on my two Ultimate machines, SP1 never appeared in Windows Update, so I had to download it directly.

While I've defended the "bloat" comments, I noticed that after my laptop boots, if I go into performance, I do see nearly 800 Megs of memory used. But if it is to have the speedy performance and Aero, I don't mind.

Joe, it seems that you have become a service-pack hunter !!

Joe, it is a Windows Update problem.

It could be your boss,Scot Petersen's PC is infected with malware and spyware because he surfed on porn sites .

Anyway , it is nothing to do with Vista SP1

Your troubleshooting skill is weak .

Brian, Vista uses memory more efficiently, instead of having it laying around idling in the system it utilizes it in various ways, whether to launch applications or improve system performance in areas such as copying or moving files around.

I downloaded and installed the latest RealTek AC'97 drivers prior to kicking off SP1. The RealTek driver is buggy, causing my audio to work inconsistently. Additionally, I downloaded the standalone 435 MB file and ran it outside of Windows Update. I had no problems with SP1 installing, but of course, M$ will get blamed for the RealTek gaff, no?

I installed Vista in a virtual machine on my Mac for use as a software testbed. The first thing I did was to start getting updates, as I wanted a SP1 image because OEMs are shipping SP1 now (or soon).

I went through all of the updates in the first round okay, 43 or so. Then I went back, there were 3, did those and it got stuck in the endless reboot loop. This is in a Virtual Machine, there's no bad memory to blame, no bad drives, sure it could be a problem with VMWare Fusion but I doubt it. This was essentially a perfect machine and I still had problems.

I finally got it recovered and managed to install Service Pack 1 though. I can't believe the hassles involved with Vista, it's like they want it to fail.

If anything this just reaffirmed my decision to switch to a Mac (granted that was close to 6 years ago now). I've had zero problems with Leopard.

My SP1 install went through the motions completed successfully, but on the final reboot I got an error "file corrupt or missing: ntoskrnl.exe" and the OS woudln't load.

Tried booting Vista DVD and choosing repair and it said that it fixed a startup problem, but same error at next boot. Tried repair a second time and got an error: unrecoverable error.

Could have called MS, but it was faster (and cleaner) to just install on a second hard drive from the Vista SP1 DVD I had downloaded from MSDN, reinstall apps and copy my data from the original drive. I'm upset with the time lost, but I have to say the system feels snappier now (doesn't it always after a clean install though) and file copies are definitely faster.

My experience has soured my opinion on Vista SP1 though and I make deployment decisions for my Fortune 100 company. We haven't deployed any Vista systems yet, and aren't likely to anytime soon.

I repeatedly got "An internal error occurred while installing the service pack" when I tried to install SP1 on my Dell XPS M1330 with Ultimate.

After doing some research on the Internet I ran SFC /SCANNOW. The report was that some files had problems that could not be repaired. To fix that I copied the install files from my Ultimate DVD to the hard drive and then ran Setup. This had the effect of reinstalling Ultimate as an upgrade.

After after getting back up to date with Windows Update I was able to install SP1 successfully. The only casualty was McAfee, but an uninstall/reinstall cured that.

"Andre Da Costa :"

"Brian, Vista uses memory more efficiently, improve system performance in areas such as copying or moving files around."

Because Vista is well known for its magnificent speed of file copying and tranfers.

Vista is progress for Windows. XP is bad and buggy compared to Vista.

75% of the World's computers can't run Vista because they are crap machines. Unfortunately, Windows XP catered to them because Microsoft wanted to make so much money it would sell Windows to anyone.

If you don't like Vista, get a Mac! Then you can at least optionally run Vista and run XP at the same time!

I have a couple of systems at home that i use with vista. I just downloaded the iso from web site and installed it. Went very well, however, vista reminds me of ME, between 98 and xp, but uses too much memory with its graphics. When you have a gig of memmory and need to add a second gig just to speed the system along, thats crazy

I can understand how people say Windows Vista reminds them of Windows ME. They are two exactly opposite operating systems from a technical and enduser point of view. Windows ME is based on the Windows 9x kernel, Windows Vista is based on the proven and reliable Windows NT kernel.

The NT Kernel uses a journaled file system which protects against things like system failure, power outages. So you don't have to do things like disk scans or try to repair the system because its self healing by design.

Vista is a multi-tasking operating system which supports pre-emptive multi-tasking and protected memory so that applications do not interfere with one another or bring down the system when they fail. Windows Vista is easier to use and makes finding information faster and its just more efficient.

Its a stark contrast to Windows ME. ME had problems that were just a result of the foundation on which it was built, but then again, it wasn't a bad system either. Peoples perception of things with Vista are being influenced by Joe's ultimate lack of understanding of Windows.

Just the improved security alone in the operating system make Vista worth the price of admission, so I think those who are dissing it either have not used the operating system or are basing their conclusions on people who do not know what they are doing in front of the PC a.k.a Joe.

I meant, I "can't" understand how people say Windows Vista reminds them of Windows ME.

Since "Microsoft is offering free Vista SP1 installation support through March 18, 2009. E-mail, online chat and phone support options are available," I guess I won't be able to buy it in time--or at all.

Uhura and Ralph,

I did say, "until XP is unable to do what I want to do."

I have been caught up in the upgrade cycle for more than 25 years and Windows with its supported software now does much more than I need. Remember the days of DOS when you couldn't even put some bold type on the page without using control codes?

I have left the workforce and no longer am I driven by employment demands. Therefore I have adopted the wait and see and "If it ain't broke don't fix it" approach.

I have thousands of dollars worth of software that Vista breaks PS7 being one so a move to Vista is a lot more than the few measly hundred dollars for the OS; my measly retirement income can no longer handle the outlay required.

COBOL disappeared because other languages became available that did all COBAL could and more. The programmers who could not see that and switch died out, the others are probably still around using other software. I am still watching so I will see what Windows 7 brings.

Dear Bernie,

I am writing this comment to express two things. The first is the fact that I am apathetic towards Microsoft and try to be polite in blog comments. The second point, however, may breach my code of conduct. Windows Se7en most likely will ONLY ship the OS, and the other parts (Windows apps replacable by other companies' programs) will be available on a per-program download, or CD for those w/o a high-speed connection. This will dramatically reduce size, bloatware, and danger of EU lawsuits. OEM's will also be able to add programs as per norm.

Sincerely,
Wyzyrd Myrrlyn

I think Vista is a great release of Windows that users will continue to adopt at a high rate. Windows XP was a great release also and its strength in the market over the years and up to now prove that Microsoft did a great job. But Windows Vista took it to the next level in areas that were vital to the changing needs of users and the state of the Internet in particular. Security, more powerful applications, high performance systems are what are helping to make Vista very relevant in todays digital age.

Architecturally, Vista is way better than Windows XP and will carry the platform forward in terms of user experience. New changes in the foundation will help drive Vista further across the spectrum. Technologies like Windows Presentation and Communication foundation in addition to the new UI language XAML will encourage developers to create applications that specifically target the stability and richness of Vista. These are the things users are not looking at and realizing they will benefit from by just moving to Vista.

Some persons are looking at Vista from a close minded perspective (oh its just another Windows release). Its more than that, its advancing the way we use our computers on a clear path. Vista has only been on the market for a year and few months and its a success. The more people I see experiencing it are craving to use it and more are continuing to upgrade to it.

I notice persons fail to list the specifics of the problems they are experiencing with Vista. Could it be that its just all talk?

Installed SP1 for Vista Home Premium in around one hour via download.
There was one hitch, after the first two parts of the install completed and the computer tried to reboot, Vista wouldn't boot up.
The SP1 install corrupted the boot files. Inserted the Vista install disk, the boot files were rewritten and after another restart the SP1 install completed.
This is probably the BSOD others were talking about, without the install disk you are out of luck.

I have installed vista on 2 home PC's and approx 150 client PCs at one of my sites.... no issues at all.... i was quite impressed...

BUT...

after the performance improvements of SP1 didnt materialise (apart from file copying speeds over the network) ive put both my laptop and workstation back to XP SP3 RC2.

SP1 installation experiences will vary, but i've found it to be good.... unfortunately it hasnt stopped vista from being a poor performing piece of rubbish OS.

Installed SP1 onto an Acer T-180 desktop..... big mistake!

My realtek sound drivers were overwritten so at first I had no sound, then after some messing sound through the speakers but no recognition of the headphone input. Attempted to re-install the realtek drivers but it no longer recognised the device. Deleting and reinstalling the device automatically reinstalled the windows drivers(even though I have this option turned off).

The Realtek sound manager software was just gone without a trace and there didn't appear anyway of retrieving it.

Then it knocked out my wireless home network and started to grind the whole system down to a slow crawl.

Thank god for system restore and that I managed to disable automatic updates in time before it put the thing on my laptop too.

I love Vista. Two months with it and I bought a Mac. Then two more Macs for the family.

And today another Mac for underneath the TV.

Its a real shame that MS cant seem to deliver a 'wow' operating system, and that their attempts to actually update this thing is breaking so many computers.

Me. I jumped off the sinking ship last summer, and have never been happier.

I can only imagine the hell of having to support an enterprise full of Vista hardware.

--* Bill

Bill Buchan,

Congratulations on winning the lottery. While you're out spending $5000 on unix boxes... the "rest of us" will be happy in our $500 rigs.

SP1 is absolute garbage. I have an almost new laptop. But SP1 (as part of Windows Update) knocked it out, but good. Fortunately I have backup computers, some of them Linux. I will have another Linux computer after this.

SP1 is absolute garbage. I have an almost new laptop. But SP1 (as part of Windows Update) knocked it out, but good. Fortunately I have backup computers, some of them Linux. I will have another Linux computer after this.

I've installed three iterations of SP1 -- beta, release candidate, RTM -- without difficulty. It fixed a number of serious show-stopper bugs, such as the slow or disfunctional networking with XP machines. Unfortunately, Microsoft seems to have said "good enough" when it came to fixing the longstanding bugs that crop up when you change your primary display -- random and erratic behavior. The best that can be said is that the behavior is now less erratic than it was. The quick launch pull-down list disappears, desktop icons are rearranged at random and in the latest iteration have all been shoved onto my /secondary/ monitor, etc.

How typically Microsoft to charge several hundred dollars and stick us with semi-functional junk. I'm still dealing with bugs that were known in Windows 95. Overall, Vista SP1 remains decidedly inferior to XP: slower, less responsive, less compatible, resource hungry, worse interface, costlier, and saddled with a nightmarish DRM scheme that slows the system and makes it difficult to work with high definition video content -- as against a prettier interface and a handful of useful fixes and features. Having wrestled with Vista for over a year, my advice to anyone contemplating an SP1 install is to install SP2 -- Windows XP -- instead, or better yet, SP3 -- OS X.

After fiddling for a few hours, I finally managed to install SP1. Here's my recipe for a DELL Dimension C521:

Symptoms:

- Windows Update does not propose SP1 for installation
- The full (standalone) version of SP1 cannot be installed because it rolls back all changes when the update process reaches 99%

Cause:

A Sigmatel audio driver (version 6.10.5511.0 or lower) is installed and prevents Windows Update from proposing SP1. No upgrade exists for the Sigmatel driver as of April 4, 2008.

Solution:

- Using Device Manager, uninstall the driver for the Sigmatel audio device. Do NOT refresh the device list after removing the driver because this might cause the same driver to be reinstalled, which isn't what we want.

- Search for Stwsys.sys on your system (be sure to include system and hidden files in your search). Once you have found the file, rename it to stwsys.sp1_bak (so you can find it again if necessary).

- Go back to Device Manager and "refresh" the device list. A Microsoft driver will automatically be installed in place of the Sigmatel driver.

- Reboot your PC

- Open Windows Update from the Control Panel and search for new updates. If this fails, wait a few minutes and try again. I had to retry 3 times...

- Once SP1 is proposed by Windows Update, download and install it.

Remarks:

- After SP1 has been installed, it is possible to reinstall the Sigmatel audio drivers without suffering any adverse effects according to IDT's web site***. On my system the Microsoft driver seems to offer exactly the same functionality as the original Sigmatel driver.

- As an alternative you can download the standalone version of SP1 after rebooting, but you should be warned that it takes much longer to install than the one proposed by Windows Update. Microsoft recommends that you use the WU version.

*** IDT now owns some Sigmatel products.

_______________________________

Hope this helps...

John

I installed SP1 on two machines with no problems. One was on a new install of Vista but the other was on a system that was far from clean - I had been using for the past 9 months and had many programs installed. SP1 seems to have fixed all the problems I had encountered (mostly the slow copy/move of files).

Jim

Good story, however, a GREAT story would be on how a Vista SP1 deployment went (successful or unsuccessful) within an enterprise or AD domain - not just one, two or three machines. This is what will motivate organizations to go with Vista.

I did a clean install of Windows Vista Ultimate, and after doing the Windows Update, installed SP1 and it has been a good experience for me with no problems.