Vista SP2 is out

[John Henry]

You can download it from the official links available at:
Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 SP2 RTW - Windows Vista Team Blog - The Windows Blog

in fact i was asking an italian version. actually only english, spanish, french, german and japanese are available.

 

[Slimy]

in fact i was asking an italian version. actually only english, spanish, french, german and japanese are available.

The other language versions are on their way.

 

[Snufffed]

32 Bit here.

[B]32-bit (x86) Windows Vista and Server 2008 SP2 RTM (Wave 1 - All 36 Languages)[/B]
Build: 6002.18005.090410-1830
File Name: Windows6.0-KB948465-X86.exe
Size: 498,781,016 bytes (475.67 MB)
CRC: 8D07A886
MD5: CAD218B99FC301836E385049C75F5EAF
SHA1: 7F8AA802E157282D84CF47950281DE53A8C26F22
HTTP: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/6uhdv1g4v"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X86.exe[/COLOR][/URL]
BitTorrent: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/8lbukgako"][COLOR=#0000ff]MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.VISTA.AND.SERVER.2008.SP2.RTM.X86.W1.RIP.DVD-WZTiSO.torrent[/COLOR][/URL] or [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/qrx7gp77h"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X86.torrent[/COLOR][/URL]

64 Bit here.

[URL="http://www.sevenforums.com/#"]
[/URL][B][COLOR=#000000](x64) Windows Vista and Server 2008 SP2 RTM (Wave 1 - All 36 Languages)[/COLOR][/B]
 
Build: 6002.18005.090410-1830
File Name: Windows6.0-KB948465-X64.exe
Size: 781,893,560 bytes (745.67 MB)
CRC: 19C1676E
MD5: DB35DF98AE5A6FD085386580A6EE8B55
SHA1: F0E46DEB7734B8ED277B0CF2304EE2BABC4D9B1C
HTTP: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/pxqfkvitn"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X64.exe[/COLOR][/URL]
BitTorrent: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/22mmwz44u"][COLOR=#0000ff]MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.VISTA.AND.SERVER.2008.SP2.RTM.X64.W1.RIP.DVD-WZTiSO.torrent[/COLOR][/URL] or [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/e7q6ftqv6"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X64.torrent[/COLOR][/URL]

Hope this helps. As you can see the Official link is there also.

 

[John Henry]

32 Bit here.

[B]32-bit (x86) Windows Vista and Server 2008 SP2 RTM (Wave 1 - All 36 Languages)[/B]
Build: 6002.18005.090410-1830
File Name: Windows6.0-KB948465-X86.exe
Size: 498,781,016 bytes (475.67 MB)
CRC: 8D07A886
MD5: CAD218B99FC301836E385049C75F5EAF
SHA1: 7F8AA802E157282D84CF47950281DE53A8C26F22
HTTP: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/6uhdv1g4v"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X86.exe[/COLOR][/URL]
BitTorrent: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/8lbukgako"][COLOR=#0000ff]MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.VISTA.AND.SERVER.2008.SP2.RTM.X86.W1.RIP.DVD-WZTiSO.torrent[/COLOR][/URL] or [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/qrx7gp77h"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X86.torrent[/COLOR][/URL]

64 Bit here.

[URL="http://www.sevenforums.com/#"]
[/URL][B][COLOR=#000000](x64) Windows Vista and Server 2008 SP2 RTM (Wave 1 - All 36 Languages)[/COLOR][/B]
 
Build: 6002.18005.090410-1830
File Name: Windows6.0-KB948465-X64.exe
Size: 781,893,560 bytes (745.67 MB)
CRC: 19C1676E
MD5: DB35DF98AE5A6FD085386580A6EE8B55
SHA1: F0E46DEB7734B8ED277B0CF2304EE2BABC4D9B1C
HTTP: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/pxqfkvitn"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X64.exe[/COLOR][/URL]
BitTorrent: [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/22mmwz44u"][COLOR=#0000ff]MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.VISTA.AND.SERVER.2008.SP2.RTM.X64.W1.RIP.DVD-WZTiSO.torrent[/COLOR][/URL] or [URL="http://depositfiles.com/files/e7q6ftqv6"][COLOR=#0000ff]Windows6.0-KB948465-X64.torrent[/COLOR][/URL]

Hope this helps. As you can see the Official link is there also.

ok thank you, but i already had rtm but someone said me that the rtw is better. Isnt't it?

 

[Slimy]

^ No, neither is better.
RTM = Release to Manufacturing
RTW = Release to Web

Whichever you get your hands on first is fine. They're identical, the only difference is the way you get it.

 

[7Dreams]

You can create your own system rescue disk. It'll suffice.
Look in your start menu--> program list

Regards
Mukul

i cant boot!

 

[Night Hawk]

to my mind MS needed to put out SP2 before 7's release to test 7's compatibility. By simple observation i deduced that SP2 contains major parts of 7's core improvements on the vista base, by releasing SP2 they had an enormous preinstalled testbed.

Not bad going, MS finally got it right, i.e. they marketed a product which is basically a moderate update of Vista but got it completely hyped to the skies. And that's every vendors dream, selling a hype.

In actual fact they just repackaged Vista and are going to (re)sell it for major bucks. Smart business acumen.

A scam also, but what hype isn't?

Under very close examination here since the beta releases I can easily dispute that one fast! 7 won't simply be any Vista Part #2 but see an entirely new core element to start with generally referred to as the MinWin kernel. Some good information is seen on the links posted on the thread that goes through that quite a bit. http://www.sevenforums.com/news/11077-truth-about-minwin-heart-windows-7-a.html

Having both RCs on at the same time as Vista here each on separate drives as stand alone installation I have a good first hand look at how things compare especially with SP2 out. 7 still comes out on top in a variety of ways while Vista is still a good stable version seen there.

One link on the threads pretty well sums up how MS reached the same conclusion about Windows simply getting too large and the need to start over from the core elements first.

 

[petrossa]

:sarc: Sure. Been running side by side since day one, can't say there's a whole lot of difference except slightly lighter load on idle in 7 and some GUI additions which anyone with some skill had already adapted himself using 3rd party additions. And libraries i need like a hole in the head.

Micro, Nano, Pico kernel or not, it's result that counts.

But hey if you want to pay $$$$ for a marketing trick MS won't stop you (and me neither)

 

[Night Hawk]

I've been in touch with a few people lately that never ran XP simply bypassing that from 2000 right into Vista now trying out the RC that would say otherwise. One was even hesitant at first not wanting to lose the time needed for seeing the 64bit RC go on replacing the 64bit Vista Ultimate until getting that on and running it a few days after getting all softwares on.

Where the differences will be noticed the most however will still be on older systems like a few running 7 with only 512mb of memory and an old single core cpu. Here besides a few minor annoyances 7 with a few small bugs it comes out in front of the pack.

 

[petrossa]

YMMV. However placing a new OS as being the salvation of outdated computers is somewhat bizarre.
The only place outdated computers still have a future is in 3rd world countries and i'm pretty sure they are not going to pay $300 to run a computer they got for free.

As per my system spec i have a medium range box, and as i said often before it's not constructed to run benchmarks well but to run apps that i need in everyday life.

And if a microkernel might shave off 1 picosecond on a cycle thats very interesting for technogeeks and looks great in benchmark graphs but not adding any real value then i don't see the point paying vast sums for it.

Windows 7 should have been Vista SP2, and i'm actually quite sure it was meant to be by the developers but the marketingdepartment saw a great opportunity and took it.

And i must admit they played it very very well. First time i'm impressed by them actually.

 

[Night Hawk]

Well when I say "side by side" that not only applies to two separate installations seen on two separate drives but the exact same programs running on both RCs as well as Vista here.

With a clean install of Vista just having been done here to see both SPs go on fresh as well I still found the RCs loaded up stepping out in front again for not pulling cpu down as they load up as well as the faster boot to finish loading time. In fact they took on XP now gone as well seeing faster start up and shutdown times while XP didn't have much more then the basics on there.

 

[petrossa]

Well, actually me too. I've dedicated even two equal disks (WDC 500) to each os, installed all applications with the same parameters separately on both os's (except that don't work under 7)

In normal everyday usage there's no difference at all. Even when i run Windowblinds to skin Vista (which doesnt work yet with 7) i can perceive no difference in responsiveness.

The only real tangible difference there is, is being able to set Audio Endpoints without shutting the app, a smaller footprint of 7 by about 100 mb and a slightly lighter idle processor load.

The other cosmetic changes are not really progress but just diversions on a theme.

Once apps are running i can perceive using my tools at hand (Process Lasso) no important differences worth paying for.

 

[Night Hawk]

Did you know you can bring back the Classic Windows look in 7? You simply go into the Control Panel>system or right click on the Computer icon on the desktop and then click on the advance system settings>Performance button and set that for performance or custom to disable all of the animations.

 

[fusion1]

Anyone know why since I upgraded Vista to SP2, now during bootup it always does a disk check Disk c: ok Disk d: ok Disk e: ok etc. Seems like this ads an additional minute to start-up time.

I went to msconfig>boot expecting something may have changed there like some kind of diagnostic setting but nothing. It almost seems like safe mode when you see all the text on a black screen before it gets to the disk check. I'd rather get rid of this annoying POST screen. Suggestions?

 

[Zaphire]

Anyone know why since I upgraded Vista to SP2, now during bootup it always does a disk check Disk c: ok Disk d: ok Disk e: ok etc. Seems like this ads an additional minute to start-up time.

I went to msconfig>boot expecting something may have changed there like some kind of diagnostic setting but nothing. It almost seems like safe mode when you see all the text on a black screen before it gets to the disk check. I'd rather get rid of this annoying POST screen. Suggestions?

Sounds like you've got what they call 'the dirty bit' set each time you boot up and a chkdsk is occuring. Somehow it's got stuck and is not clearing. If you Google for the term 'dirty bit' and stuck or set you should find a way to clear it and boot up normally.
Of course if your disks are really corrupted chkdsk may have be having trouble fixing them. In which case the dirty bit stays set.

 

[fusion1]

Thanks I will check it out. Hopefully it fixes it. Weird thing is the beta version of SP2 worked like a charm.

 

[fusion1]

Seems like the fix for cleaning the dirty bit didn't work for me. This also before it runs the CHKDSK is it says loading windows software and you see things listed in the system32 folder. Then a banner showing Windows Vista SP2 build 6900 or something appears then the CHKDSK and everything always comes out clean then it boots into Windows. Annoying...

 

[Night Hawk]

Anyone know why since I upgraded Vista to SP2, now during bootup it always does a disk check Disk c: ok Disk d: ok Disk e: ok etc. Seems like this ads an additional minute to start-up time.

Sounds like you've got what they call 'the dirty bit' set each time you boot up and a chkdsk is occuring. Somehow it's got stuck and is not clearing. If you Google for the term 'dirty bit' and stuck or set you should find a way to clear it and boot up normally.
Of course if your disks are really corrupted chkdsk may have be having trouble fixing them. In which case the dirty bit stays set.

On a clean primary seeing a totally fresh install of the Vista test build seeing all updates handed out to SP2 beta testers the boot process automatically checks all disks by default while quite a bit faster paced then you would see with a scheduled check disk.

MS made it part of the boot process to alert the user if problems like bad sectors come up rather then waiting until something catastropic happens like a drive failure or something now buggy like an invalid boot sector or partition table problem.

Personally while not seeing this on the 32bit Vista it was interesting to that visible on the 64bit Vista Ultimate SP2 build downloaded from Technet for a good look over.

 

[mukul]

I installed SP2 on Vista Home Premium. Didn't notice any major change like improvement in boot-up time etc which people have been reporting
But I hope atleast it'll stop crashing now. SP1 used to crash every week.

 

[Night Hawk]

It didn't make any difference here at all for startup or shutdown times. The Tecnnet newsletter sheds a little light on seeing support added to Vista for newer hardwares. I suspect that may include support for the new USB 3.0 standard that will be coming for home users in 2010 as well.