Vista SP2 components?

  keith mac 09:09 18 Jun 2009

I'm always wary of service packs and SP2 is a huge download without many obvious benefits beyond SP1 - reading postings there's been a few problems too - not unusual.

I've read in one of the mags (maybe PCA, I read others too) that system start up time is improved and this IS an attraction. Can other users confirm a quicker start up time in everyday use?

If so, and/or if there are any other useful components, is it possible to download just these components instead of the full service pack?

Alternatively, will Vista SP2 be available from MS like XP SP1 used to be?

  Jim_F 11:02 18 Jun 2009

No problems here and perhaps marginal improvements but it never seemed too bad to me in the first place.

You can download here click here

There was a preparatory update - KB955430 - in April which was supposed to smooth the way by updating the installer.

  keith mac 11:32 18 Jun 2009

Thanks for the link but Windows Update had already offered me the chance - at nearly 350 meg I decided I wasn't interested unless there was something special in the pack. I read it contained all the fixes, patches etc released thus far plus some bits line HD support that were of no interest to me.

What I would like, though, is/are the component(s) which is/are supposed to improve start-up times. I might just be getting impatient but even my non-technical wife remarked how slow our computer is to get to the point it can be used - and I have removed every scrap of software I dare from the start up routine. Is this just how Windows becomes, though, once new software has been installed?

There must be any number of commercial software packages all claiming to improve Windows' performance but in a reasonably well maintained machine, do they have any measurable effect I wonder?

Maybe SP2 only improves a neglected machine?

  keith mac 11:34 18 Jun 2009

oops - some bits LIKE HD support, first paragraph

  Jim_F 22:17 18 Jun 2009

My view is that I take the SP - for future support and consistency - otherwise we have a mish-mash of upgrades that noone could support.

I accept its a pain to download this on dialup but if you ever have to rebuild a system having the service packs on hand is invaluable. (You may find them on coverdisks which could save the trouble)

  keith mac 09:13 19 Jun 2009


Yeah I also see matters that way too but I need to feel convinced that there truly is going to be a significant benefit.

The coverdisk aspect is most logical to me. PCA and other mags could easily provide a dedicated service pack disk (I would have thought) thus avoiding all the hassle of individual downloading. It would also simplify the arduous process of Windows re-installations.

Perhaps in time a magazine cover-mounted disk will be made available?

  Coltch 12:13 19 Jun 2009

I remember when XP Sp2 came out it was included with quite a few magazines as separate disc.

XP SP3, Vista SP1 & SP2 haven't been, don't know if it was to do with WGA or Microsoft saying the magazines couldn't distribute them.

I always download the full net installer so that I can slipstream the OS install CD/DVD.

  keith mac 13:04 19 Jun 2009


I thought I had remembered that too but was unsure so I didn't mention it earlier.

It's hard to see any logic in MS denying permission to distribute except that there'd be a potential financial gain through additional magazine sales.

The company is pretty canny so maybe that actually could be a reason why they'd refuse?

  mooly 18:05 19 Jun 2009

SP2 is definitely SLOWER on my laptop, by some margin. The time to boot to windows and the desktop is the same, it's the sidebar that now takes far longer to load, around 1 min50sec as against 1min20sec or so.
It seems however to have fixed a few minor annoyances, namely folder views now seem to stay firmly put without occasionally reverting their view, and IE8 which I have on a custom 130% setting with a high (150dpi) now to stays put, before it would revert to 100% on opening IE8 on many occasions.

  keith mac 18:39 19 Jun 2009


Interesting info. It seems there'd be no improvement for me but I don't use the sidebar so that wouldn't be a problem. What a nuisance, though, that it's actually slower!

I lost some proper folder icons recently but thought it was 'something I'd done'. I can live with the odd-looking ones I've got now but an easy fix would be handy???

I haven't used IE8 much because mostly I now use Firefox - I started when I had problems with IE7 some while back - I've forgotten what they were now.

One problem with the Firefox browser is that some online banking won't accept it.

  mooly 07:42 20 Jun 2009

It is a nuisance !
If you use Acronis or similar, why not back up your system and give it a try. That's always preferable IMO to trying to undo major changes with system restore and so on.
I started another thread a few days ago, just to see the reaction , about running Vista from the start with no updates at all, and using just a good security package. Can you believe that all the updates and service packs for Vista have nearly doubled the size on disc of the operating system. Clean install around 10 or 11gb, add all the updates and it's nearer 18 or 19gb.
What folder icons have you lost. Desktop shortcuts ? or folders within documents etc. Do you know how to change the folder icon displayed ?
If you think you've lost the "list" to choose from try running the sfc /SCANNOW command prompt (as admin) to fix any corrupt files.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5T review: Hands-on

See the Best Button Badge Designs of 2017

iPhone X review

Black Friday 2017 : date, sites participants & bonnes affaires