Why No SP2 for Win7?

[Mem]

Originally Posted by Maximilian
Fair enough. I just don't like how they're going about things. MS are trying to force people to the windows store and force them to get used to that godawful metro interface so they will buy surface pros and windows phones. Thats their overall strategy.

You are not forced,in fact I've not used Store in several months even for browsing.

I can understand why they want a Store since Android/Google has one and they want to compete,remember Win8 onwards is more then a desktop PC OS so they want their piece of the tablet/phone market as well.
Some people want and like having a Store,having it there leaves it up to the user in question if they want to use it or not.

Try to think past desktop only PC OS with blinkers on and look at the bigger picture and competition out there.
Btw I still have my Android phone and tablet,no Windows phone or tablet so again I'm not forced,besides Store has desktop software there for the PC if you bother to look.

 

[mikeymikec]

You are missing my point since I was talking about Win7 only without SP2,Win7 with SP1 has ironed out all the serious stuff

And evidently you missed my point, being that service packs have in the past been used essentially as patch rollups without the OS in question having "serious issues", which is exactly what people here are asking for. If enough people ask for a patch rollup (call it a service pack if they like), MS would be stupid not to listen, especially considering that Win7 is by far the most popular OS.

You can't blame Microsoft for concentrating on Win10.

I said as much in the rest of the post that I quoted of mine previously.

 

[Maximilian]

If you will keep "soling" the Tech. Forums with OT type "Satirical" non tech Pics. You will get next time an Infarction.

An actual moderator, now ill take notice :thumbsup:

Obviously. The real question is does this necessary have to be a bad thing? Having tried the 10 technical preview, I don't find the new version that bad actually. Except the lack of aero, and general look. Honestly its 2015, why go with the flat looks-like-something-out-of-the-late-80s look? Not function mind you, that is coming along quite well. Microsoft has also talked about opening the store to include conventional win32-api programs. Of course I can see various pros and cons with this. But having a central place to manage updates and the like, it could be good. Especially for the casual crowd.

It definitely doesn't have to be a bad thing, its just how they've gone about it so far. By forcing metro on people initially so those people have to get used to the interface to use the OS. That was a deliberate move on MS's part so people would then be more open to the rest of their lineup which use metro. It didn't pan out quite like that though, people simply rejected and complained about it.

The unix philosophy springs to mind here, do one thing and do it well. Metro is good for tablets and phones. Desktop is good for desktops/laptops. Shoehorning one UI for every platform was a terrible idea.

The store can be the same, that flat style you mention can be the same but the UI itself should account for the platform its being run on. Maybe windows 10 will be better, we'll see. It definitely dosent look as bad a design as 8 did.

Try to think past desktop only PC OS with blinkers on and look at the bigger picture and competition out there.
Btw I still have my Android phone and tablet,no Windows phone or tablet so again I'm not forced,besides Store has desktop software there for the PC if you bother to look.

Competition? Oh right yeah like Apple. Who havent gone down the one UI to rule them all route. And are doing fantastically. Yup you should look at the competition, they're a classic case of doing it right.

 

[Mem]

And evidently you missed my point, being that service packs have in the past been used essentially as patch rollups without the OS in question having "serious issues", which is exactly what people here are asking for. If enough people ask for a patch rollup (call it a service pack if they like), MS would be stupid not to listen, especially considering that Win7 is by far the most popular OS.

I said as much in the rest of the post that I quoted of mine previously.

What you want and what you get are two different things,anyway we agree on the last point so that explains why you don't have one,besides Win7 is not the only OS out there.

Personally I would rather they spend more resources and time on Win10 then ageing OS like Win7 with another service pack.

 

[Mem]

An actual moderator, now ill take notice :thumbsup:



It definitely doesn't have to be a bad thing, its just how they've gone about it so far. By forcing metro on people initially so those people have to get used to the interface to use the OS. That was a deliberate move on MS's part so people would then be more open to the rest of their lineup which use metro. It didn't pan out quite like that though, people simply rejected and complained about it.

The unix philosophy springs to mind here, do one thing and do it well. Metro is good for tablets and phones. Desktop is good for desktops/laptops. Shoehorning one UI for every platform was a terrible idea.

The store can be the same, that flat style you mention can be the same but the UI itself should account for the platform its being run on. Maybe windows 10 will be better, we'll see. It definitely dosent look as bad a design as 8 did.



Competition? Oh right yeah like Apple. Who havent gone down the one UI to rule them all route. And are doing fantastically. Yup you should look at the competition, they're a classic case of doing it right.

You think Apple have done it right?..Well hate to burst your bubble I refuse to spend any money on POS Apple,don't forget Android which I like,besides your last statement was about being forced to use Store,I corrected your statement that you don't have too.Store UI is relative since that will always change with every OS and get different opinions from users out there.

I'm not a particular fan of Store UI or Metro either,but can accept Store will get improved down the road.

An actual moderator, now ill take notice :thumbsup:

FYI I was actually an AT Mod at one point but asked to be removed as one ,also forum guidelines are for everyone here.

Desktop is good for desktops/laptops. Shoehorning one UI for every platform was a terrible idea.

Old days desktop PC had no competition so desktop OS was all you needed,today different world so making an OS that does it all I can understand,you or I could argue it will take time for it to evolve ,Win10 is their second attempt to refine it and still the same direction(all in one OS) they are going.

It'll be interesting to see how it has evolved in say ten years time(Store as well).

 

[ninaholic37]

We have come Microsoft shills in here... when market has completely rejected Windows 8, they are raving about it every time Windows 7 is mentioned.

Yup, more people are still on XP. No need to stick with M$ beyond XP imo

 

[Ketchup]

I think Microsoft could save themselves a lot of time and effort if they just improve upon what works.

My idea would be:
Keep the expirations, but take what people like (7 for example) and make an ever-so-modest improvement on it. Call it a new OS. Use the time saved to compile quarterly updated ISOs for customers. Use the rest of the time saved to focus on business customers, where most of their market is anyway.

Stop wasting time on the mobile market, which they don't (and probably never will) have a strong hold on anyway.

But they won't. They still can't get over that there is a market they lost out on, and will spend forever trying to get a corner on.

Here's a thought Microsoft - spend your resources making your stuff work better with their stuff, and focus on not losing what you have.

 

[ArisVer]

Why not a service pack? Why Microsoft?

Take a finished Microsoft product for example, Windows 2000; quotes from Wikipedia.

"Windows 2000 was released to manufacturing on December 15, 1999 and launched to retail on February 17, 2000. For ten years after its release, it continued to receive patches for security vulnerabilities nearly every month until reaching the end of its lifecycle on July 13, 2010. Mainstream support ended on June 30, 2005. Extended support ended on July 13, 2010. Windows 2000 has received four full service packs and one rollup update package following SP4, which is the last service pack. These were: SP1 on August 15, 2000, SP2 on May 16, 2001, SP3 on August 29, 2002 and SP4 on June 26, 2003."

What Microsoft could have done...
Release one final service pack which could be installed right after the first release installation ISO or at any other service pack installation.
What it would cost? A few GB of RAM and bandwidth on a few servers. Apart from this final service pack, they should have freely available the Windows 2000 ISOs in their final versions.

This should have been done will all of their products and one might see it as a "museum".

 

[Mem]

I think Microsoft could save themselves a lot of time and effort if they just improve upon what works.

My idea would be:
Keep the expirations, but take what people like (7 for example) and make an ever-so-modest improvement on it. Call it a new OS. Use the time saved to compile quarterly updated ISOs for customers. Use the rest of the time saved to focus on business customers, where most of their market is anyway.

Stop wasting time on the mobile market, which they don't (and probably never will) have a strong hold on anyway.

But they won't. They still can't get over that there is a market they lost out on, and will spend forever trying to get a corner on.

Here's a thought Microsoft - spend your resources making your stuff work better with their stuff, and focus on not losing what you have.

I think Win7 is as far as it could go,look at Win95 to Win7,basically same UI,you can only keep doing that for a limited time,throw in new hardware that came later like tablets,phones,touch etc that Microsoft have an interest in and it's a whole new ball game.

I would like to see whole new UI from scratch but I know a lot of people don't like change or something completely different and they would stay on Win7 design forever so be like ground hog day,they could however take a lot of new ideas from Linux.

As they say in Star Wars "you can only shave a wookie so many times".

 

[Ketchup]

Hi Mem, I think we all know that you are very open to change. However, the reception of Windows 8 should tell you that most of the population is not. Is it an "old" style? Yes. Does it work? Yes.

I'll give you an example: I do IT work for the retail industry. One of these retailers just went through a major system upgrade: registers, controllers, servers, staff computers, everything. When upgrading the Fujitsu uscan system, the entire application had to be re-written, but in the end, the gui looks exactly the same as it did before, even the voice is exactly the same one that was used since the system was released 20 years ago. The latest system offers more functionality than the older systems for sure, but many customers wouldn't even notice.

Why? most people don't like change, and Windows 8 is just another example of this fact.

 

[Mem]

Hi Mem, I think we all know that you are very open to change. However, the reception of Windows 8 should tell you that most of the population is not. Is it an "old" style? Yes. Does it work? Yes.

I'll give you an example: I do IT work for the retail industry. One of these retailers just went through a major system upgrade: registers, controllers, servers, staff computers, everything. When upgrading the Fujitsu uscan system, the entire application had to be re-written, but in the end, the gui looks exactly the same as it did before, even the voice is exactly the same one that was used since the system was released 20 years ago. The latest system offers more functionality than the older systems for sure, but many customers wouldn't even notice.

Why? most people don't like change, and Windows 8 is just another example of this fact.

You keep on about Win8 but what about Win10?..I'll be interested to see what you and other people think of that.


Yes I'm always open to change but even I did not expect Microsoft to get it 100% right with Win8,after all its their first hybrid(all in one OS) and to me it's going to take time ie a few versions before its going to be as great as I think it can be.


I can remember every OS having debates in AT forums,I remember when 2K users were saying we don't need XP etc,Vista was a heated topic even as a genuine desktop OS and UI,some things don't change here.

People keep saying Win8 but look at history it goes way back before then.

Home users and business IT are two different areas,yes you could argue they need to that into account ,but if it's simplified on both ends won't matter in the end,everything takes time when you go in a new direction or expect the OS to change and evolve.

I'm ready and looking forward to Win10 don't know about you guys however .

 

[Remobz]

I don't get why people are complaining about the free 8.1 update. Yes, you have to go through the Windows Store or find an ISO. No, you do not need a Microsoft account to install it. If your hardware can run 8, it can run 8.1. There is zero reason not to update. Unless you're running one of the (ancient) CPUs affected by the CMPXCHG16B debacle. In which case you're likely better of sticking with 7...

My 2c.

I downloaded 8.1 on an AMD laptop which had 8.0 and now my laptop is slow and sluggish. Should of just stayed with 8.0 instead.

 

[Ketchup]

You keep on about Win8 but what about Win10?..I'll be interested to see what you and other people think of that...

My thoughts on 10 are on other threads, but for now I think it is "decent."

The customizable start menu is ok, but it isn't quite customizable enough yet (for example, if you take away too many icons, it doesn't shrink, just leaves you will dead space). The desktop fonts are just now back to win 8 level, and I don't know what was up with the "new" icons for a few of the builds. The latest leaves only "This PC" with the ugly look, but I still don't know what is going on there.

I also don't understand the Settings Menu. Just exactly how Microsoft thinks users are aided by the random differentiations between the Control Panel and Settings menu is beyond me.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

It definitely doesn't have to be a bad thing, its just how they've gone about it so far. By forcing metro on people initially so those people have to get used to the interface to use the OS. That was a deliberate move on MS's part so people would then be more open to the rest of their lineup which use metro. It didn't pan out quite like that though, people simply rejected and complained about it.

The unix philosophy springs to mind here, do one thing and do it well. Metro is good for tablets and phones. Desktop is good for desktops/laptops. Shoehorning one UI for every platform was a terrible idea.

You will not get any arguments against that from me.

I think Microsoft could save themselves a lot of time and effort if they just improve upon what works.

My idea would be:
Keep the expirations, but take what people like (7 for example) and make an ever-so-modest improvement on it. Call it a new OS. Use the time saved to compile quarterly updated ISOs for customers. Use the rest of the time saved to focus on business customers, where most of their market is anyway.

10 is what 8 should have been. An incremental update on 7. We'll see if Microsoft learns anything from the 8(.1) debacle.

I downloaded 8.1 on an AMD laptop which had 8.0 and now my laptop is slow and sluggish. Should of just stayed with 8.0 instead.

Tried a clean install? It sounds like something went wrong...

It could also just be that your 5400RPM HDD has become badly fragmented by the update process. If you got one of those in it.

BTW, if you got one of those, replace it with an SSD. Works wonders. Nobody should have to suffer 5400RPM HDDs...

 

[Magic Carpet]

If that's the case, then i can understand you're a little (insert your favourite strong language here). Could it have been better handled? Certainly. I don't think it fair to yank support on previously supported hardware. But you have to admit this is a very corner case involving what is, after all, 10 year old hardware. That still supports the x86 version of 8.1. Which it is likely better of using anyway. On the bright side plain 8 is still supported until 2023, it just wont get any feature updates. Aside from graphics, 7 drivers should function under 8 in a pinch, and somehow i don't think hardware companies are ready to pull the plug on 7 support just yet.

It is a very corner case, indeed. But still, I don't like the attitude. You don't release an update to existing customers that may have issues updating with. Clearly, they have dropped the ball. As a result, some feel cheated. Trust me, there are quite a few of people still running dual-core Athlons / Opterons / dual-socket Opterons with heaps of ram, that are still perfectly fine to use. The minority? Absolutely. But they are still customers, however few and small.

On the other side i don't think it fair that every-new-os has to support hardware back 10-15 years (which can run the x86 version fine). At some point you have to give up supporting older hardware, i don't expect a 486 to run windows 10 either, the world moves on. If one by chance requires an old windows version, there are always vms.

I agree, but. You can't really compare the "1995 - 2005" period to the "2005 - 2015" one. Things have stagnated massively, focuses changed. Markets shifted.

If one needs to breathe new life in old hardware, a light-weight linux distribution will do much better then the newer windows.

Yep, that's an option, I am currently looking into right now.

Btw, if you still on a first gen athlon64, i'd suggest to begin saving for some new hardware. Even a basic bay trail/am1 athlon is going to run circles around that thing, at a fraction of the power consumed...

Thanks, but... no thanks. Power isn't really an issue.

I think there should have been an SP2 for Windows 7 (NT 6.1). I know mainstream support has ended, but that just ended in January of this year.SP1 for Windows 7 was released in Feb - March 2011 which was just over 4 years ago.Microsoft should have released SP2 for Windows 7 in maybe 2013 or early 2014 and then they could have stopped.As for Windows 8.1 not supporting certain old Athlon dual core CPUs, that is fine as Windows 8/8.1 is meant for new PCs and at least the RAM and CPU speed have not increased much if at all since Vista which is nice.As for the original Athlon 64 dual cores which came out almost 10 years ago in mid-2005 being outdated, well maybe they are, but they still can be very useful today even for some modern things. Sure you cannot play most of the latest games on them well if at all and many other very high end apps, but they are just fine for web browsing and word documents and even basic multimedia of today especially with a descent amount of RAMN and video card. Thus I think the law of diminishing returns has really taken affect the last 10 years regarding computers. I mean a high end computer from 2005 is much more relevant and useful today in 2015 than a high end computer form 1995 would have been in 2005. Agree or disagree on that.

At least, you know, what you are talking about :thumbsup:

I totally agree. And not only that, but the updates installed in Windows since Vista (NT6.0) cannot be made permanently installed thus wasting disk space unless they are a service pack in which case you can get rid of the old backup files. And that is also true with Windows 7 and even 8/8.1 as well.At least with Windows NT 5.X (Windows 2000, XP, and 2003), you could make the hotfixes permanent and even roll them up into an unofficial service pack and it made integrating them easier and you could make them permanent. That is the one area Microsoft took a big step back on with regards to Windows NT 6.X (Vista, 7, 8/8.1). I do not know why they would have designed it where the hotfix updates cannot be made permanent and thus waste disk space. We shall see if that changes in Windows 10 (NT 10).

Not only that. Didn't you hate that with 6.0 and up, you could not change install location of windows/program/user folders? I absolutely hated that. That was very flexible and sometimes actually usable depending on situation (I had these things spreaded on multiple drives for speed & security purposes).

I downloaded 8.1 on an AMD laptop which had 8.0 and now my laptop is slow and sluggish. Should of just stayed with 8.0 instead.

Similar experience (had some lagging issues with IE11), only with a Merom-based sony laptop. I didn't have the time to investigate, so I just re-installed Windows 8. Fast and snappy again.

Windows 8.1 tried to be more than just an update, and in my experience it's broken more things than it fixed. Of course, I have some rigs running 8.1 just fine, that don't have any issues with that. They've done some cool things under the hood, but some of the changes I didn't like:

- still no proper start menu with the options of minimizing "have your attention" crap (instead we got a nice start button back to Metro interface)
- all that "Win X" menu shortcuts were available from day 1 on windows XP (via some reg tweaks)
- forcing you to have an online account with Skydrive
- removal of Windows Experience Index (it's still there, but you have to dig for it)
- Internet Explorer 11 while getting more secure, got incompatible with a few apps I was using and of course, Internet Explorer 10 was not there anymore
- the awkward, slow, illogical update system (you need XYZ key, I had Win 8.0 w/ MC)

These things annoyed me the most, but I still run 8.1 on the computers that can run it "issue-free". But I am seriously debating of migrating some of my rigs to *nix environment. Because I am beginning to despise the Microsoft tactics of constantly fixing things that are working fine (I was all *nix before Windows XP SP2, so I am quite familiar with my options). Face it, these days, 90% of the things people do on their computers can be done in a web browser, so Windows isn't required anymore.

As for Windows 10, I haven't checked that yet. But the more control Microsoft is trying to take from me, the quicker I abandon their system. I can already see where it's going and I don't like that. I am not a fan of Windows Phone too, so all the benefits / integration that are coming in post Windows 10, I am not going to take advantage of. Currently, Microsoft doesn't have any killer apps other than games, so it's feeling its vulnerability and is still trying to win a lost battle. Just admit defeat.

10 is what 8 should have been. An incremental update on 7. We'll see if Microsoft learns anything from the 8(.1) debacle.

Numbers talk.

 

[denis280]

I'm ready and looking forward to Win10 don't know about you guys however .

So far not to optimistic about it,but that's my opinion,in conclusion.no body is wright or wrong.in one way MS is forcing peoples to go toward windows 10,when win 7 is supported till 2020,so it would be nice from them to make a sp2 for it,not every body have high speed internet,so yes the download are like forever.

 

[Mem]

So far not to optimistic about it,but that's my opinion,in conclusion.no body is wright or wrong.in one way MS is forcing peoples to go toward windows 10,when win 7 is supported till 2020,so it would be nice from them to make a sp2 for it,not every body have high speed internet,so yes the download are like forever.

I can understand those with low speed broadband,but it's becoming the norm(downloading updates) with everything ie tablet updates ie PlayStore ,game updates like from Steam,Origin etc...

Even with Linux you have to download quite a few updates as you probably know.

End of the day you never know Microsoft may change their mind,but then after 2020 you probably have to move on anyway if you are still on 7.

My mum at 80 is on 7 (we got her to move from XP a few years back) and I'll probably get her to move to Linux eventually,all she does is browsing,online shopping,skype,emails,she actually uses her Android tablet more then Win7,but she is pretty adaptable once you show her even at her age.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

It is a very corner case, indeed. But still, I don't like the attitude. You don't release an update to existing customers that may have issues updating with. Clearly, they have dropped the ball. As a result, some feel cheated. Trust me, there are quite a few of people still running dual-core Athlons / Opterons / dual-socket Opterons with heaps of ram, that are still perfectly fine to use. The minority? Absolutely. But they are still customers, however few and small.

I agree, but. You can't really compare the "1995 - 2005" period to the "2005 - 2015" one. Things have stagnated massively, focuses changed. Markets shifted.

I think the real reason is that Microsoft, for some reason best known to themselves, insisted on viewing 8.1 as a new OS, rather then a service pack. Because that is what it is to 8 when viewed historically. No major changes, but a lot of spit and polish, and the infamous Return of the Start Menu.

They obviously felt entitled to yank support for some hardware, because, hey, its a "new" OS...

Thanks, but... no thanks. Power isn't really an issue.

Excuse me, but doesn't that graph illustrate my point nicely?

Firstly, the 5350 has higher single thread performance, and two additional cores.

Secondly, you're comparing a CPU that cost something like $500 when it launched to a CPU that currently retails for $52. $500 today will not buy you a 5350, but a rather more powerful 4790K with money to spare. If you need more CPU grunt you can get a 5820K for $50 more and still have money left towards the platform.

Both of those will take that ancient 4200+ to the cleaners...

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/35?vs=1260

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/35?vs=1320

(Yes, I know that's a 4600+, but the additional 200MHz, isn't going to make any difference what-so-ever)

 

[GTaudiophile]

I've two bad sticks over the years , first was Crucial back in the VIA KT133 motherboard days and Corsair only a few years ago,I had to reinstall the OS.

Never know when it will happen to you.

As to reinstalling?.. Think I would for peace of mind and for anything critical that PC is used for.

I reinstalled with just the one 8GB DIMM and it all went smoothly. No hangups at all. All in all, a SP2 slipstream would have still saved me probably 90 minutes.

Meanwhile, the new DIMMs arrived from Amazon within like 48 hours. The old DIMMs have been sent back and all is well again.

Love the feeling of a fresh install.

 

[Mem]

I reinstalled with just the one 8GB DIMM and it all went smoothly. No hangups at all. All in all, a SP2 slipstream would have still saved me probably 90 minutes.

Meanwhile, the new DIMMs arrived from Amazon within like 48 hours. The old DIMMs have been sent back and all is well again.

Love the feeling of a fresh install.

I did the same thing with my fautly Corsair ,guess what?.. My Samsung drive decided to die and screw up my OS,so had to do another reinstall,got to love hardware failures lol.


I'm 50/50 at the moment on doing a clean install of Win10 down the road or just the upgrade method when it's released officially.

My Win7 is with XP ie in OS heaven RIP.

 

[Muse]

Some people just don't want to move on,for example a lot of people still using XP over Win7 or 8?...Metro on Win8 does not even come into it.

End of the day some people like to hang on even after EOL.


Regardless you can bet some people will find some new excuses with Win10,some things don't change.

My desktop (HTPC/HDTV-PC) is running XP. The mobo won't support MS OS beyond that. I plan to buy new mobo etc. and get a newer OS... meantime, is there a way to disable those MS nags saying "your attention is required?"

 

[JoeBleed]

My desktop (HTPC/HDTV-PC) is running XP. The mobo won't support MS OS beyond that. I plan to buy new mobo etc. and get a newer OS... meantime, is there a way to disable those MS nags saying "your attention is required?"

removing update kb2934207 may do it. though i thought that was to be a onetime nag. may not be.

 

[ninaholic37]

meantime, is there a way to disable those MS nags saying "your attention is required?"

I don't get any nag screens on XP. Can you post a screenshot?

 

[Hugo Drax]

I refuse to downgrade to Win 8.X. I did a fresh install of Win7U with SP1 slip-streamed. But I keep fighting Windows Update. I've had a BSOD, I've had update installations hang for over an hour. It's nuts!

Why is there no SP2???

Apple is so much better at how they do it.

Install OS X 10.x

download the latest combo pack.

boom.

Microsoft way is install Win7

6,000 updates and 40 reboots later you could be done.


I never understood why microsoft does not offer patch rollup's that would include the entire set of patches like Apple does.

 

[WilliamM2]

My desktop (HTPC/HDTV-PC) is running XP. The mobo won't support MS OS beyond that. I plan to buy new mobo etc. and get a newer OS... meantime, is there a way to disable those MS nags saying "your attention is required?"

Go into task scheduler and disable the end of life task. Also, remove MSE if you have it installed or you will get the same message from it.