back to article Microsoft begins automatic Windows 7 SP1 rollout

Microsoft will start the automatic rollout of Windows 7 Service Pack on Tuesday. The extensive software update will be handled via Windows Update, and will make its way onto PCs whose users have Automatic Update enabled. "Updating customers to Windows 7 SP1 is part of our ongoing effort to ensure continued support and improved …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

watch it they're going to throw Metro in your face

lol, it would not surprise me if they did pull something like sticking Metro on everyone's Win7 PC and then say it was a programming bug that'll take 6 months to fix.

9
11

Re: watch it they're going to throw Metro in your face

Methinks you might feel more at home in a slightly more hysterical comments forum. Engadget is thataway.

10
4

Re: watch it they're going to throw Metro in your face

@DF118... nah this is the right place. Slight rephrasing...

lol, it would not surprise Eadon if they did pull something like sticking Metro on everyone's Win7 PC and then say it was a programming bug that'll take 6 months to fix.

OBLIGATORY ALL-CAPS EPIC FAIL COMMENT.

1
0
K
Bronze badge
Trollface

move Windows to a yearly release cycle

No matter how its explained - they want people to upgrade!

But the effect is more people building their own deployment images.. Would not surprise me if Microsoft take a dislike to this and remove WDS.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Clarify

Clarify Win 7 SP 1 released in Feb 2011?

Why now in Feb 2013?

Am I missing something?

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Clarify

It was released in 2011, but the user had to go seek it out themselves. The news today is that it has been added to the Windows automatic updates.

3
0

Re: Clarify

Microsoft's Support Lifecycle policy for Windows is to support a service pack (or the original release if there has only been one service pack) for two years after the release of the following service pack. The actual end date is aligned to the next Patch Tuesday (second Tuesday of the month), which is 9 April. Future updates will only be installable on Windows 7 SP1 as a baseline.

All this means is that if you reinstall Windows 7 from a disc or image without SP1 applied, Windows Update will first offer all the security and critical updates from RTM to this month, then it will offer SP1, then any updates released after SP1.

Windows 7 *itself* is in mainstream support until 13 January 2015, and extended support until 14 January 2020. In the mainstream support period, you can call up for paid support, you can use any free incidents that you got when buying the product, you can get non-security hotfixes and if you really want to, you can make change requests. In extended support you still get paid support but the free incidents are no longer valid; you still get security hotfixes but other fixes require an extended support contract, which you have to take out within 90 days of the end of mainstream support; warranty claims and design change requests are no longer accepted.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

A small thing...

but that software that lets your PC share its wired internet connection by WiFi requires SP1.

I haven't noticed any difference since I installed SP1, though I can't remember my machine freezing on resume from standby, which it occasionally did before.

0
0
Bronze badge

the retards should hurry up and fix security permissions not being inherited on any new folder and file created, its proper tedius having to set the permission yourself on everything new in the past 2 months

1
19
Holmes

I think we have found the retard here - do you have a mirror to hand?

9
1
Bronze badge

???

Zmodem I don't give a darn about Windows, but I am curious to what you mean exactly. There is quite a few answers and questions I have in mind, but I'm not sure how you are implying "inherited" in this case.

1
0
Bronze badge

I haven't had any problem with that

Are you sure it is not something corrupted in your specific installation? Or maybe an incorrect setting?

0
0

@ zmodem ... What, were you not satisfied with the number of down votes you gathered with your desert eagle nonsense?

7
1
Bronze badge

microsoft are retards for breaking security, and want exterprises to update from XP to windows 7

existing permissions work

if you have

full control on program files for administrator group, system, creator_owner, and read and execute for users, with replace and inherit permissions on all childs

only old installer put the permissions on all new folders and files 100% of the time, its the same for most compressed archives, or any new file and folder that is created by system or program

0
4
Silver badge
Happy

Ahhh c'mon the Desert Eagle bit was one of the funniest things I've read on here recently.

1
1
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Files system permissions will only do exactly what you tell them to do. Nothing is broken, or something so major would have hit tech site news long ago.

What you are basically saying is that you are too stupid to mess with something that you don't fully understand and you screwed it up.

To fix your incompetence, just run the following in a elevated command prompt:

secedit /configure /cfg %windir%\inf\defltbase.inf /db defltbase.sdb /verbose

1
1
Pint

Ahhh c'mon the Desert Eagle bit was one of the funniest things I've read on here recently.

Yeah I admit it was pretty trainwrecktastic. Couldn't stop reading. In fact ISTR the missus having a right old go at me for reading it instead of jumping her bones and she's nowhere near as fugly as xboxzilla back there.

Lol if she ever reads this I'm so dead.

0
0
Bronze badge

@TheVogon

secedit is pointless, setting the permissions on the folder lets you take full ownership of your hard drive and you can copy and edit any file when you like without running anything in admin mode,. admin mode is there because windows 7 is crap

if you rightclick on a folder and set the security persmissions, and replace permissions to inherit parent permissions,. to this folder, subfolders and files, the persmission should be applied to all new files when a program gets installed

which happen when you first install windows 7, when you update windows 7 from the past 3 months, the perssions dont get applied to most folders and files

windows 7 is as crap as linux, and the lameness will just start to kill of pc`s, because of retarded security permissions and not being able to do anything on your own drive

0
0
Bronze badge

why would`nt you want a desert eagle if your special ops if you have been in the army for a few years and can handle the weight and kick, instead of carrying your single main weapon of a shotgun when clearing villages

0
0
Anonymous Coward

its proper tedius...

having to mentally correct both punctuation AND spelling.

10
0

Re: its proper tedius...

*Teadeearse.

1
0
Bronze badge

Re: its proper tedius...

some programs have 1000 files, you wouldnt want to spent a week setting the security permissions on every file and folder for visual studio so you can use it after spending £10,000

0
1
wsm

Discrete?

Discrete regular patches sounds more like Apple charging for service packs. Is Microsoft so desperate for revenue streams?

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Discrete regular patches...

Tena lady?

2
0
Stop

But will it remove all the previous patches?

I have multi-Gb of patches in Winsxs filling up my SSD from two years worth of updates. Will SP1 remove all these, as it inserts its 1050Mb of goodness (plus a further 1050Mb of backup goodness) into my system?

I'd really like that.

5
0
Meh

Re: But will it remove all the previous patches?

Don't be silly, we are talking the kings of bloatware here! Stuff it all in!

1
0
Boffin

Re: But will it remove all the previous patches?

No - the point of side-by-side (WinSxS) is to keep old versions available so that programs can use the exact versions they were built expecting, rather than introduce issues with later updates. The approach these days is that "Disk space is cheap, let's use it". Whether you agree or not; that's the way it works.

Assuming you don't want to ever uninstall the service packs and updates, you can use a combination of tools to reduce the amount of space taken up.

Use CCleaner (http://www.piriform.com/ccleaner - remembering to go for the freebie version hidden at the bottom, not the pay links!) with the option to remove update uninstallers checked.

Then open a command prompt and run this:

dism /online /cleanup-image /spsuperseded

It will take a while and won't make a massive difference but it does chop a few gig out of the Windows install size.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: But will it remove all the previous patches?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2795190

First link on Google searching for winsxs. It will tell you all about Explorer mis-reporting the size of the winsxs folder due to the NTFS hard links, and how you can make a SP install permanent.

1
1
Silver badge
Windows

Seems a more logical move to me.

Its easier to bug test a few updates at a (comparative) few megabytes as opposed to a beelion byte (sic) update thats depoloyed to 5 million PC's worldwide and then causes a quarter of them to baulk and fail.

Either way, 8 will never make its prescence felt on any thing i own.....TIFKAM or otherwise...

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Seems a more logical move to me.

Nah - Just do it the Java Way (tm):

try:

# include pretty much the entire internet-in-a-jar to get this weeks favrite frameworks to do .. whateva, I forget!

run stuff

catch everything

print OK

Job done - off to check 4-chan.

0
0
AOD
WTF?

Never mind SP1, what about IE10?

Last night my Win 7 Pro laptop was automagically updated to IE10 which broke the 1 thing I use IE for, hosting my office remote access software.

A quick trip to the System Restore sorted that one out but grr. I do so hate it when MS insist on labelling their browser upgrades as "essential" updates rather than optional.

I know I could set Windows Update to show me the updates for approval prior to applying them, but it's still tres annoying.

1
2

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Re: Useful Service Pack

Oh and the patching for Linux is so much better how? Surely you run yum and update all your packages after your mint install... oh you don't....

Just out of interest how do you update more than one Linux machine from a central repo without going to the internet each time?

Although you need a server license WSUS is free and updates all Microsoft products, hence you would only pull the SP down once ever in a business.

3
9

Re: Useful Service Pack

Just to the 'just out of interest' portion of your post: Take a look at apt-cacher or apt-cacher-ng.

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Useful Service Pack

You can set up a local repository and configure your machines to update from that. If you're setting up your machines from a standard install image then this will be a trivial addition.

And Mint uses Apt, not yum. Yum is for RPM-based distros.

8
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Useful Service Pack

Psst msage your showing your ignorance.

yum is Redhat Mandriver (Mandrake) & Suse. Mint, Ubuntu are Debian Linux and use apt.

0
0
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Re: Useful Service Pack

Only non Microsoft programs do that, but in the future as most stuff moves into the Windows store, it will go away as an issue.

For now, Secunia PSI provides the service you were looking for....

0
0
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Useful Service Pack

"Oh and the patching for Linux is so much better how?"

Simple - most package managers just grab the latest packages and installs them in one go.

Windows Update can take 4 or more check-download-install-reboot cycles to go from latest official media to fully up to date (depending on what version of Windows and what extra libs get added)... And on top of that, MS make it ridiculously difficult to allow Windows Update through restrictive firewalls (their info on how to is a joke) and almost impossible to cache without using their payware WSUS server (which also assumes you're controlling the clients enterprise style, so doesn't work for repair shops, public access wifi, etc).

Is that enough difference for you?

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Useful Service Pack

"MS make it ridiculously difficult to allow Windows Update through restrictive firewalls"

All you need is access to a few internet URLs. As shown here in point 2.: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/bb693717.aspx

The info on how to do so seems quite simple to me, but maybe you are a moron?

Oh, and WSUS is a free application. It's now integrated into Server 2012, so no charge other than for the server OS itself.

0
0
FAIL

Re: Useful Service Pack

Correction of your correction:

Mandriva and Mageia are RPM based and use urpmi.

0
0
FAIL

Errm

"In the past we've suspected this change in cadence could reflect a desire by Microsoft to encourage people to go to Windows 8 quicker."

Most people don't want to go to Windows 8 AT ALL....

8
1
Bronze badge

Re: Errm

Wild guess, maybe, but it might mean that Windows 8 doesn't exist, this time next year.

I've noticed several things which Windows 7 does better than previous versions, mostly under the bonnet. Can we separate the in-your-face changes such as Metro from the hidden stuff? To be honest, I doubt that. Linux can do better, but it doesn't escape the concept that the designers know best.

1
1

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Anonymous Coward

Re: Errm

Erm you are kidding, right? Or very clueless. Linux distributions have an order of magnitude more security patches than any version of Windows. For instance SUSE 10 - 3,800 known security vulnerabilities. Even Windows XP only has about 450.

In areas where Linux is actually used like Webservers you are about 3 times more likely to be hacked if you run a Linux box than a Windows one.

nb - Windows is POSIX compatible and has been ever since the first version of NT. Full ACLs were put into every level of the operating system from scratch. To come close to that on Linux you have to run an experimental Filesystem (NFS 4.1) and run a bolt on security package to fix the flaws in the core design - SEL Linux.

0
5
Silver badge
Windows

Re: Errm

Well of course you can inflate those numbers quite nicely if you include the security issues in every single userland package and compare it to only the OS flaws in windows.

Windows had a POSIX-compatiblity subsystem up to windows 2k. It was optional. They had to buy in a proper POSIX compatibility layer to replace it and even that was marketed as a stand-alone product until recently. It was only included in windows by default from 7 forwards. Windows therefore has not been "POSIX-compatible" from the start. It has been at best optionally, partially compatible and if you knew anything about POSIX you'd understand that MS's own subsystem was a steaming pile of shite. Which is why they had to buy in another.

NFS is a network file system...

I give up. You haven't a clue.

1
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Anonymous Coward

Re: Errm

Those number are from Secunia. As per the analysis by Jeff Jones, even if you package adjust Linux to match Windows Server capabilities, then it still has a much higher vulnerability count.

As stated Windows has been POSIX compatible ever since NT 3.5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem

Actually it was included in all versions by default UNTIL Windows XP.

It clearly is you who don't have a clue: http://wiki.linux-nfs.org/wiki/index.php/ACLs

0
2
Silver badge

Re: Errm

Which part of "NFS is a network file system" don't you understand?

And whether it was included by default or not, Microsoft's POSIX subsystem was still a steaming pile of shite that was only partially compatible and only lumped in to claim it was there. It was useless.

0
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums