Active Oldest Votes. Performance updates: These updates improve XP performance and enhance interoperability and hardware compatibility. Security Updates: These updates include previous security updates and new updates. Minor feature updates: Features like NAP have been added so that customers can now take advantage of Windows server. Support for WPA2 is also available as a separate download. Improve this answer. Kara Marfia Kara Marfia 7, 5 5 gold badges 31 31 silver badges 56 56 bronze badges.
Yah, exactly why I went to it. Eliminated a lot of windows updates. Sources to check the benefits. I would suggest, for good continued support and latest fixes, you shift to SP3. Sounds prudent but does beg the question "What support?
Clay, many patches and updates for whatever they are worth need the service pack to be the recent one. When MS stops support for a service pack, machines running that one usually do not get all the recent patches. I would recommend it. I try to keep my machines all patched and up-to-date. Jim B Jim B I would guess that you're right, but what do you based this assumption of "improved stability" on?
I tend to follow the simplistic "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach. And SP2 broke a lot of stuff with improved security. I technology environment can sort of "evolve" to be an interconnected web of dependencies.
Changing one thing can create the Butterfly Effect. Now you need all new peripherals. Radim Cernej Radim Cernej 3 3 silver badges 12 12 bronze badges.
Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook. Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name. The percentage difference between faster and slower is insignificantly small. Less than 2 or 3 percent in some benchmarks could be dismissed by most but when gamers are looking to squeeze every extra frame out of their machines…it may count. There are lots of differences. This is a fisadvantage of upgrading. Almost everything relates to security improvements. I have windows xp sp1 cd how to convert it into sp2 regards kamal.
I just ordered the sp2 cd and am going to install it because all I want is to upgrade from IE6 sp1 to IE7 or at least ADD IE7, by the way cody an operating system will never die before the people do… : it just gets ignored and thrown into the closed and locked away for years, and years…. But, with Microsoft discontinuing support for SP1 I was, kind of, forced into it. Any suggestions on how to fix this problem? Hi guys, I installed windows xp sp2 few dAYS ago, but now my play speed music is high for all software win.
HELP, if someone can tell me how to solve the pbm or decrease the play speed. HI guys, I installed windows xp sp2 few dyas ago, but now my play speed music is high for all softwares. You know you can still get security updates without SP2 so whats the point except to let it hold your hand while your on the PC. Are you struggling with storage performance issues in your virtualized environment?
VMware vMotion allows live migrating of virtual machines VMs from one host to another without downtime. It was a SolarWinds combines a powerful log analyzer with high-level network performance views into an incredibly useful pack. Quickly solving complex Performance counters are a useful way to track server performance metrics and monitor resource usage.
Back in the day, A virtual machine VM may run into performance issues due to multiple factors. The most common ones are CPU, Faulty VMware infrastructure configuration is the main reason for bad VM performance. The wrong selection of drivers or incorrectly With their version 18 release, Condusiv Diskeeper finally solves one of the product's only historical annoyances--reboot dependency.
The user Not too long ago, systems administrators had no way to optimize their servers' SSDs. In this review, you'll learn Storage Replica is a new feature in Windows Server that allows us to do storage-agnostic block-level replication of We started with VSAN 3 nodes, then We are coming to the end of our article series on Azure Storage Services.
In this section, we are And now, face it, Vista is slower, and will ever be. Two years from now, it will be bearable, but now? No thanks. Indeed, while technically you may be right to say that it is not fair to compare a one year old OS with a more than 5 years old one, what people are interested in is sheer performance.
I'm consider myself happy when I go on people's PCs and see that they have 1GB of ram and the point is that they simply won't upgrade their PCs just to run Vista Also, the problem is that the added features simply do not explain the added overhead in performance which is sometimes massive The number and purpose of the new features simply do not justify the added overhead While I can be OK with boot time, why do we see so much difference in files copy performance?
The problem is that customers are not going to buy the "It is OK for it to be slower, because it is brand new and have added features" excuse. Granted, the same was true with 98 and XP many users, especially home users, didn't get through the Win phase , but it was a whole different kernel and the gap in requirements wasn't as massive as from XP to Vista. While you are right that better hardware is required for better I would prefer to say "newer" software to run, it is something that software use and abuse with the hope of this to cover their occassional sloppy programming.
I think it is clear that today, the focus is not on performance but on features and looks, and who cares how bloated it is becoming : it is why people have the feeling they need to renew their PC to do barely the same thing as before. If programmers had performance more in mind when writing programs, our PCs would run much faster today than they did in the last years. Unfortunately, I am not feeling that my PC that I renew almost every year has been much faster than a few years ago in day-to-day tasks and I can't help but be sad when I realize that the added performance from the new hardware i have been buying has been sucked away from me to make up for software bloat and occasionnal sloppy programming I'm not only speaking of Vista here but almost any software vendor today.
My view of Vista is that it has wanted to do too much at once : new user-interface very confusing and breaking years of user-experience and habits, ending up in huge training costs and productivity loss , new security features while they are certainly good, some seem overkill over the loss of compatibility and it is why most admins think that XP is "secure enough" and insane hardware requirements compared to what most people or companies are equipped with.
Not saying that things shouldn't move, but Microsoft tried to do too much at once, resulting in a lot of rejection from its user worst point for me over all I said is user-interface : it is why I am not planning to deploy it yet in my organization.
I hope Microsoft can get back to its sense with Windows I am not as tech savvy as i would like to think but i will give it a shot. Especially when the numbers show Vista faster at single, less memory draining procedures.
Mike -edit if not : - is right on the money when he says the test should be conducted on pc's with the hardware available at the time of Introduction. The test is obviously skewed in favor of XP.
I will shortly be drooling all over Vista when i go x64 with 8gb or maybe try for 16gb. Remember, XP needed a mb machine to run relatively good, in a time when mb was the default Come on ppl, move on.
In organizations having little to do with IT as their business let's say a clothes factory , executives sees IT costs as a something they have to pay for employees to work, but they may not want to invest more for little benefits. IT Managers have to have a great deal of good reasons to tell the executives they want to order new PCs in the organization in most of the case, the rest of the PC like the CPU or Hard drive is too old as well to run Vista decently, so a simple memory upgrade won't do.
Now, it is quite unfair to compare 98 with XP since they were different kernels types, but as I said, it is true that reactions were more or less same. However, with XP, you got huge improvements over 9x : stability is several orders of magnitudes better, you could join it to domains, etc Vista has some extra-features most of these can be obtained through third party program running on XP anyway , but not enough to justify the upgrades for most people.
You rarely work on the server directly, unless it is a terminal server, so the user interface doesn't bothers as much as on a workstation OS. It is also easier to justify hardware upgrades on some servers than for lots of clients.
Same with Security : you obviously need even more security on the server than on the clients, so having to solve some either software or hardware incompatibilites is worth the security gain here. As soon as companies will renew their computer fleets, they will either keep the preinstalled Vista or deploy their own once most of the fleet will meet hardware requirements with dignity, but before, it seems hard to justify.
From what I've read disabling the background search process will improve performance quite a bit. Victor, thanks.
I was thinking that I was bashing MS too hard recently. It seems that is not the case then. You know what? Windows 7 will be even slower. I absolutely count on that. JC, I think 4GB is not really high-end anymore. Memory has become quite cheap lately. I still have my old XP machine at home. When I bought it, it was absolutely high-end and I think it was only 2 years old when XP came out. This machine is definitely slower than my Vista laptop now which I bought short before Vista came out.
Andy, I think we still have to wait if Server will get the same critics as Vista. C'mon Micheal. Just re-visit what you have said here. Microsoft are asking soon it will be forcing when the drop XP supprt me to upgrade my organisations OS to Vista. In the process I will need to spends thousands buying new kit, re-training staff, and updating applications.
And you are defending them?! Think if they were selling a product in any other market - cars, TVs, holidays
0コメント