|
|
|
Ask your Windows 7 (beta) questions here
|
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
3. February 2009 @ 16:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by omegaman7:
I have several usb flash drives, several usb ports, etc. The flash drives appear to NOT be the culprit since when xp is running transfers work perfectly. Out of everything I try, Xp works, windows 7 does not. There must be some kinda setting. Ive had very little trouble with this OS. And this would be a VERY SERIOUS BUG if not a setting.
Unexpected end of archive is usually from a file that hasn't completely transferred over, such as an incomplete download. Can you unpack the archive in XP with no problem? It is possible that it's an incomplete archive to begin with.
BTW, I did have the encryption problem before transferring between Vista and XP systems, but the file name would usually be in another color.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
3. February 2009 @ 17:06 |
Link to this message
|
When I download ANY file, it works on windows 7 machine. When I transfer it via usb flash drive to XP machine, The rendered file is not accessible by windows xp. Its almost like windows 7 changes the file somehow. But then, when I transfer it back to the windows 7 machine, I get similar errors. Almost like windows 7 is protecting itself.
I'll try downloading something tonight to the XP machine and transfering it to the windows 7 machine, and see what happens. Im afraid im pressed for time now.
Please believe me when I say "Windows 7 IS THE CULPRIT" Its too logical to dismiss at this point.
If a transfer from same machine running xp to other xp machine WORKS, then Windows 7 HAS to be the culprit!
By the way, Windows 7 is now a fresh install! Is it possible, that it simply doesnt want to share its installer packages? .bmp files, .txt files have transfered without incident. Though I imagine that .exe files are more complex.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
3. February 2009 @ 18:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by omegaman7:
When I download ANY file, it works on windows 7 machine. When I transfer it via usb flash drive to XP machine, The rendered file is not accessible by windows xp. Its almost like windows 7 changes the file somehow. But then, when I transfer it back to the windows 7 machine, I get similar errors. Almost like windows 7 is protecting itself.
I'll try downloading something tonight to the XP machine and transfering it to the windows 7 machine, and see what happens. Im afraid im pressed for time now.
Please believe me when I say "Windows 7 IS THE CULPRIT" Its too logical to dismiss at this point.
If a transfer from same machine running xp to other xp machine WORKS, then Windows 7 HAS to be the culprit!
By the way, Windows 7 is now a fresh install! Is it possible, that it simply doesnt want to share its installer packages? .bmp files, .txt files have transfered without incident. Though I imagine that .exe files are more complex.
Oman7,
Don't think for one moment that M$ doesn't know that either! It's the price people are going to have to pay for Snubbing Vista. They've made it plain that they want XP gone! What better way to do it than sabotage it with Win 7? When you say "Windows 7 IS THE CULPRIT", you are 100% correct!
I'm not being cynical about it either. Just this last week we were reminded that when the final XP SP3's time period runs out, you will no longer be able to prevent any upgrades, even if they are turned off. They already know that some upgrades are harmful to certain computers, but you are going to get them anyway. Someone has to pay for all the losses caused by Vista, and they are going to do everything in their power to force Win 7 on us and give XP the final boot! They seem to feel that XP was the reason Vista failed! It became too good, and M$ can't make any money if they can't force sales of new hardware and software! People will just stick with what they have now, and Micro$oft is bound, bent and determined to prevent that from happening!
There's a lot more to all of this than meets the eye, that unfortunately, I'm not at liberty to discuss here or anywhere at the moment, because of my own part in the lawsuit against Micro$oft, and I'm not about to jeopardize my own case and eventual settlement!
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
3. February 2009 @ 18:36 |
Link to this message
|
Lol, I had my Suspicions! Thats the most logical, and undoubtful statement ive heard today! I would wager my life on that!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
4. February 2009 @ 15:38 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by theonejrs:
They seem to feel that XP was the reason Vista failed! It became too good, and M$ can't make any money if they can't force sales of new hardware and software! People will just stick with what they have now, and Micro$oft is bound, bent and determined to prevent that from happening!
*SIGH*
If you had to transfer files over a network, or unzip an archived file in Vista when it first came out (and on some PC's to this day) then you would've pulled your hair out and went with XP over Vista.
Truth be told, MS is losing NOTHING in the end. For example, we have enterprise licenses at my work for Windows XP and Vista. We pay for a site license, which is a general number of X amount of computers. It's FAR more than you would think a license would cost, akin to getting DirecTV with NFL Sunday Ticket in your local tavern. On top of this, we purchase OEM built systems from HP, which come with Vista PRELOADED.
Catch 22, our IT department has said NO to upgrading to Vista, because of all of the hassle and the original security woes when it was rushed out. We all think Vista is crap, and we are right; that is why XP continues to exist.
So, if we pay for XP & Vista enterprise licenses and are paying (indirectly) for a Vista license on the OEM PC, how many times is MS getting paid? I doubt they care about Vista "losing" them money, if in fact it is.
The real profit comes from large organizations and OEM builders who have sucked their money into Windows, which I don't necessarily have a problem with, but I wouldn't be the first to say that MS, or their former CEO Mr. Gates, are hurting at all!
In the end, when was the last time you "bought" Windows for your PC? Most people do not build their own systems; they go to the local retail store and buy an HP, Sony, Dell, etc. and are happy. Windows comes with it, usually with no choice (unless you custom order and can downgrade to XP, for example.)
It's these same vendors that were pushing MS to get Vista out, so they had something new and exciting to possibly "boost" sales. It was a terrible rush job and MS is quickly trying to plug the holes with Windows 7. So far, they've done an exceptional job from what I've experienced.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 4. February 2009 @ 15:41
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. February 2009 @ 18:05 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by SProdigy:
Originally posted by theonejrs:
They seem to feel that XP was the reason Vista failed! It became too good, and M$ can't make any money if they can't force sales of new hardware and software! People will just stick with what they have now, and Micro$oft is bound, bent and determined to prevent that from happening!
*SIGH*
If you had to transfer files over a network, or unzip an archived file in Vista when it first came out (and on some PC's to this day) then you would've pulled your hair out and went with XP over Vista.
Truth be told, MS is losing NOTHING in the end. For example, we have enterprise licenses at my work for Windows XP and Vista. We pay for a site license, which is a general number of X amount of computers. It's FAR more than you would think a license would cost, akin to getting DirecTV with NFL Sunday Ticket in your local tavern. On top of this, we purchase OEM built systems from HP, which come with Vista PRELOADED.
Catch 22, our IT department has said NO to upgrading to Vista, because of all of the hassle and the original security woes when it was rushed out. We all think Vista is crap, and we are right; that is why XP continues to exist.
So, if we pay for XP & Vista enterprise licenses and are paying (indirectly) for a Vista license on the OEM PC, how many times is MS getting paid? I doubt they care about Vista "losing" them money, if in fact it is.
The real profit comes from large organizations and OEM builders who have sucked their money into Windows, which I don't necessarily have a problem with, but I wouldn't be the first to say that MS, or their former CEO Mr. Gates, are hurting at all!
In the end, when was the last time you "bought" Windows for your PC? Most people do not build their own systems; they go to the local retail store and buy an HP, Sony, Dell, etc. and are happy. Windows comes with it, usually with no choice (unless you custom order and can downgrade to XP, for example.)
It's these same vendors that were pushing MS to get Vista out, so they had something new and exciting to possibly "boost" sales. It was a terrible rush job and MS is quickly trying to plug the holes with Windows 7. So far, they've done an exceptional job from what I've experienced.
what I was talking about is hardware and software. Software manufacturers want to show that their software is compatible and put that on the package. Same thing with hardware, and M$ makes money on every sale! Selling the old "Vista Compatible" and now Win7 Compatible! Manufacturer's have to pay M$ to be able to put that on the package! LOL!! The downgrade thing is a rip-off! Dell charges an additional $150 if you want XP, thanks entirely to M$! It's called legal Blackmail! ROFL!!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
4. February 2009 @ 18:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by theonejrs:
Originally posted by SProdigy:
Originally posted by theonejrs:
They seem to feel that XP was the reason Vista failed! It became too good, and M$ can't make any money if they can't force sales of new hardware and software! People will just stick with what they have now, and Micro$oft is bound, bent and determined to prevent that from happening!
*SIGH*
If you had to transfer files over a network, or unzip an archived file in Vista when it first came out (and on some PC's to this day) then you would've pulled your hair out and went with XP over Vista.
Truth be told, MS is losing NOTHING in the end. For example, we have enterprise licenses at my work for Windows XP and Vista. We pay for a site license, which is a general number of X amount of computers. It's FAR more than you would think a license would cost, akin to getting DirecTV with NFL Sunday Ticket in your local tavern. On top of this, we purchase OEM built systems from HP, which come with Vista PRELOADED.
Catch 22, our IT department has said NO to upgrading to Vista, because of all of the hassle and the original security woes when it was rushed out. We all think Vista is crap, and we are right; that is why XP continues to exist.
So, if we pay for XP & Vista enterprise licenses and are paying (indirectly) for a Vista license on the OEM PC, how many times is MS getting paid? I doubt they care about Vista "losing" them money, if in fact it is.
The real profit comes from large organizations and OEM builders who have sucked their money into Windows, which I don't necessarily have a problem with, but I wouldn't be the first to say that MS, or their former CEO Mr. Gates, are hurting at all!
In the end, when was the last time you "bought" Windows for your PC? Most people do not build their own systems; they go to the local retail store and buy an HP, Sony, Dell, etc. and are happy. Windows comes with it, usually with no choice (unless you custom order and can downgrade to XP, for example.)
It's these same vendors that were pushing MS to get Vista out, so they had something new and exciting to possibly "boost" sales. It was a terrible rush job and MS is quickly trying to plug the holes with Windows 7. So far, they've done an exceptional job from what I've experienced.
what I was talking about is hardware and software. Software manufacturers want to show that their software is compatible and put that on the package. Same thing with hardware, and M$ makes money on every sale! Selling the old "Vista Compatible" and now Win7 Compatible! Manufacturer's have to pay M$ to be able to put that on the package! LOL!! The downgrade thing is a rip-off! Dell charges an additional $150 if you want XP, thanks entirely to M$! It's called legal Blackmail! ROFL!!
EDIT:M$ losses were staggering in the last half of 08! Vista was way late and with all the problems with it, I can fully understand why they lost money!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
5. February 2009 @ 16:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey russ, Isnt it illegal for windows 7 (M$) to change the nature of an installer package? If it changes a NON open source install package, thats illegal, isnt it? Because if it werent changing it, Windows xp wouldnt being giving me the blues about file corruption, LOL. Uh oh. A hole in their plans :O
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. February 2009 @ 18:00 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by omegaman7:
Hey russ, Isnt it illegal for windows 7 (M$) to change the nature of an installer package? If it changes a NON open source install package, thats illegal, isnt it? Because if it werent changing it, Windows xp wouldnt being giving me the blues about file corruption, LOL. Uh oh. A hole in their plans :O
The funny part is it's like looking at the late 1890's, early Twenties. Unfettered Capitalism, right in front of out eyes, in the guise of the "Holy Grail"! In the Twenty First Century, yet! ROFLMSOAO! The worst part is their recent announcements were ill timed, as no sooner was their release schedule for Win 7 known, the developers & tester's discovered 3 very serious Bugs! I'm pissed that it ruined my drive! If it was just me, no harm no foul! But it's a complaint I've heard from others too. Just a rumbling noise followed by a loud "Crack" while using the disk to install. That's all right, I added it to the lawsuit this morning! I gave them the RAR file I downloaded from M$ site. Not CNet, not Guru3D, but MiscoSoft's official site!
It's not the first time, either! See, I'm a very logical person, so think about this. Win 98 became great! Would you have accepted 2000 as the next best upgrade? I wouldn't have! So we got ME! ME proved to be a horror show as it had so many incompatibility issues with drivers, software, even within itself. Some of it's written code was incompatible with other code inside ME! So we got 2000, and everybody loved it. You could still play all your old, Fun, DOS based games with it. Then XP comes out and support for anything stopped for 2000! They tried to do that with Vista, but the consumer had had enough, and fought back! Successfully I might add!
So here we are at Win 7, and XP has decided suddenly to run slower? The computer I'm on right now is running like it's wading in Fudge! I've owned this machine for over 5 years. I know what it runs like! Not like this crap. I took out SP3 and all the recent upgrades, which improved it some, but whatever they put in it has slowed a pretty fast machine down to a crawl! Am I missing something or do you see a pattern here, because it sure looks like one to me!
Now, I'm gonna have to wipe the drive and put something else on it! Maybe 2000 this time. I have some old games I'd like to be able to play again, and there's tons of drivers out there for XP and 2000 now! Something to do after the AMD build is done! Hopefully everything will come tomorrow, but I'm betting on Monday! It's out for shipping so we'll see!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5. February 2009 @ 18:01
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
5. February 2009 @ 18:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
You know what sucks? Were at their mercy too. Some people HAVE to have/use windows. Oh well, I suppose as always, I'll adapt.
Lawsuit? Beta's are used at our "own risk" I mean not to step on your toes man. Simply curious, where your coming from. :) That is complete BS though
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
Moderator
|
5. February 2009 @ 18:17 |
Link to this message
|
Russ, now you see why i won't allow Windows Updates on any of my machines, all my XP installs are as old as the hills ie only a handful of updates are on my SP2 slipstreamed cd :)
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules *** |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
5. February 2009 @ 18:23 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by creaky:
Russ, now you see why i won't allow Windows Updates on any of my machines, all my XP installs are as old as the hills ie only a handful of updates are on my SP2 slipstreamed cd :)
Amen to that creaky :D
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. February 2009 @ 18:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by omegaman7:
You know what sucks? Were at their mercy too. Some people HAVE to have/use windows. Oh well, I suppose as always, I'll adapt.
Lawsuit? Beta's are used at our "own risk" I mean not to step on your toes man. Simply curious, where your coming from. :) That is complete BS though
It's to be shown in Court as an example of some of the things M$ does in exercising it's power over you, and eventually forcing you to do things their way! Just another "Nail"! These changes only came about in the last week or so! It ran beautiful when I first fired it up last Tuesday! I was even playing Age of Empires, The Warrior Chiefs on it. now, it's unplayable!
Russ
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
6. February 2009 @ 08:53 |
Link to this message
|
What on Earth are you guys talking about? SP3 does not make the system run slower! In fact, it's only a rollup of the 90 or so hotfixes that came out since SP2's release, along with the IE7 installer.
The only thing that would "tank" your system in this case, would be a load of temp files and fragmented files/directories. I work with a network of 1300 systems, and a disk cleanup and defrag suddenly makes XP run faster (who'd thunk it?) That's also considering the enterprise antivirus software and firewalls that we have in place keep most of the junk and malware from accumulating on the pc.
As for the ME/2000 comparison, there is none. ME was in the lineage of 95/98 while 2000 comes from the NT line. Both were released at the same time. XP was a direct upgrade of 2000. Nearly ALL applications that worked on 2000 work on XP because they are directly related Operating Systems, unlike Vista/7.
I would honestly think there is some type of hardware issue if are having the problems you are describing.
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
6. February 2009 @ 08:57 |
Link to this message
|
Omega,
That is still odd about the file transfer. Even with the TabletPC that had the failing hard drive, I was able to transfer, copy, etc. without any issues. I've been going back and forth between XP and 7 systems, probably 3-4 computers, over the network and flash drives, all with no problem. I'm out of guesses for ya!
|
Moderator
|
6. February 2009 @ 09:01 |
Link to this message
|
My point was purely about not allowing any of Microsoft's updates (other than the contents of SP2) onto any of my kit.
Each to their own, i had 2 bad experiences where a few updates got onto the machine (due to accidental turning on of Auto Updates) and those 2 machines played up like merry hell until a rebuild. I know millions of people buy into the Auto Update thing, just not me.
On Linux systems i'm ok with it, no fear of DRM functionality sneaking in there :p
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. February 2009 @ 09:07
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
6. February 2009 @ 12:43 |
Link to this message
|
Yah... My poor brothers computer got SP3 thrown at him. His computer was running slow one day when he called me. So I had him check a few things. He told me that Automatic updates was on. I was like, OH NO!!! Told him to type, "WINVER" and it said that SP3 was installed. To this date I havnt removed it. But certain bugs remain. We both are kinda busy.
Windows 7 is definetely the culprit, with the BUG, or setting thats going on. There is simply too much logic in my face to deny it! I dont know how sprodigy is able to get by, but this weekend I will get to the bottom of this BS!
1. There is nothing wrong with my USB header.
2. I have multiple flashdrives, THEY'RE FINE.
I can say this because my XP boot drive does not experience the problem when transfering.......UH OHHH.... I just realized something. I dont know if it makes much difference, STILL ILLEGAL!
Im running 64bit Windows7. It still shouldnt be altering the files though!!!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. February 2009 @ 12:45
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
10. February 2009 @ 08:36 |
Link to this message
|
Omega, I never asked if you were running 32 bit XP and 64 bit 7. I'm running all 32 bit with no problems, so perhaps you did stumble onto a bug. I would let the MS community know (it is your responsibility as a beta tester, remember the EULA/TOS?)
As for SP3, we haven't had a problem with it on our network of 1300 machines. Only issue was on some laptops, it wouldn't install through automatic updates or the "install while shutting down" which would just sit there forever (literally if you let it) without actually "installing". We had to manually install it with the redistributable, but that was still isolated to only a handful of machines.
As for updates wrecking havoc, the only time I experienced that was with a Realtek LAN driver that Auto Updates would always update and install, it would kill my network connection and the only repair was to use the MS System Restore and block that particular update. I'm not sure what it did or where it came from, but it could never be fixed by rollbacks, uninstalling, or even updating from the Realtek site.
I won't rule out very strange things happening, but I will say from experience that it may only happen in a few specific cases.
|
Moderator
|
10. February 2009 @ 10:59 |
Link to this message
|
Sure, as i say i'm sure millions of people are happy with their Auto updates. (I'm a Unix guy so the thought of Auto Updates doesn't sit well with me, though i'm not against them on Linux boxes of my own, but on big Unix iron everything is done manually, and rightly so!).
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
10. February 2009 @ 13:20 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by SProdigy:
Omega, I never asked if you were running 32 bit XP and 64 bit 7. I'm running all 32 bit with no problems, so perhaps you did stumble onto a bug. I would let the MS community know (it is your responsibility as a beta tester, remember the EULA/TOS?)
As for SP3, we haven't had a problem with it on our network of 1300 machines. Only issue was on some laptops, it wouldn't install through automatic updates or the "install while shutting down" which would just sit there forever (literally if you let it) without actually "installing". We had to manually install it with the redistributable, but that was still isolated to only a handful of machines.
As for updates wrecking havoc, the only time I experienced that was with a Realtek LAN driver that Auto Updates would always update and install, it would kill my network connection and the only repair was to use the MS System Restore and block that particular update. I'm not sure what it did or where it came from, but it could never be fixed by rollbacks, uninstalling, or even updating from the Realtek site.
I won't rule out very strange things happening, but I will say from experience that it may only happen in a few specific cases.
Yah, I'm not sure about the SP3 problem. It made it onto one of my systems before and was fine. For whatever reason, its not fine on his.
Yes, im running 64bit windows 7 and 32bit xp. Ive ran both 32 bit and 64bit windows 7. I reinstalled 64bit to no avail! So, whether its doing what its supposed to illegaly, or a major bug, I do not know. I think I started to send them the info once but was distracted, and never finished it. I'll do that this morning.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
11. February 2009 @ 15:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
LOL, OK. I dont know what the heck!!! 32 bit doesnt have the same issue! So, 64 bit seems to be the only culprit. If no one else has submitted this problem, then it must be something to do with the board or cpu's ability to run 64bit mode. Any thoughts on this? I guess now, I can reinstall 64bit, on my NEW board and see what happens. Is it even worth it??? If the general public needs to embrace the new OS, then whats the point? I happen to like windows 7 ALOT! Powerful enough equipment will run it seamlessly!!!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
11. February 2009 @ 16:50 |
Link to this message
|
Creaky, LOL... forgot to mention that we restrict automatic updates on that same 1300 PC network I mentioned earlier! Wonder why we would do that? ;-)
Omega, glad to hear things are working. I for one am pumped about Windows 7, now I'll just have to figure out how I'll be busting Windows Media DRM on the new OS and I'll make the jump when it launches... or maybe I'll rig a virtual machine for that dirty work.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
11. February 2009 @ 17:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yah...I think im just gonna chalk it up to a RARE occurence. I suppose time will tell however. There is no problem within the OS itself. Its mearly sharing data (installer packages) with XP when the problem presents itself. I can see myself moving on to windows 7 with in a year, sooo...I could care less about this minor bug. The strengths out weigh!!! :D
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. February 2009 @ 17:24
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Moderator
|
11. February 2009 @ 18:20 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Paul Thurrott @windowsitpro.com:
Windows 7 Public Beta Draws to a Close
Microsoft on Tuesday began shutting down its download servers for the
Windows 7 Public Beta, ending weeks of unfettered access to a
feature-complete, near-ready version of its next operating system. The
shutdown will occur in two phases. Yesterday, the software giant turned
off access to new downloads. Those who still have downloads in progress,
however, have until 9am PST tomorrow to complete those downloads.
The download stoppage refers only to the public servers. Microsoft
customers with MSDN or TechNet subscriptions can continue to download
the Windows 7 Beta via those programs.
Microsoft originally opened up the Windows 7 Beta to the public on
January 9, but surprisingly high demand swamped Microsoft's servers,
requiring the company to take them offline for most of the day. The next
day, Microsoft upped capacity and restored the downloads, and extended
the period during which people could download the beta. While the
software giant has yet to release official figures, several million
people are expected to have downloaded and installed the Windows 7 Beta
on their PCs.
Reviews of Windows 7 Beta have been overwhelmingly positive, in sharp
contrast to the public's reception of the very similar Windows Vista.
Most have described the beta as essentially bug free, highly compatible,
and usable in day-to-day situations. This, too, is in sharp contrast to
the experience with most Windows betas.
Microsoft's next Windows 7 milestone in a single major release candidate
(RC) build, which is expected to be offered to the public as well.
Again, Microsoft isn't talking, but I think an April timetable is
reasonable. I expect the final release of Windows 7 to occur sometime
around mid-year. Not coincidentally, the Windows 7 Beta expires on
August 1, 2009: Just after I expect Microsoft to finalize the product.
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. February 2009 @ 18:23
|
|
