Win 7 SP1 RC

[Peter Foldes]

What "wrong information" did John relate? It looks correct to me.



The forums here are not restricted to TechNet subscribers and nor is the
download of SP1 RC. This one is a public beta.

Nil

He (John) posted as above ***This one is a public beta. *** And BD is a well known
Troll who is gullible and is liable to pass along that the RC is a Beta


--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

I tend to *break* it - and then say "How do I fix it?" !!!

D.

Reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw a few years ago:
If it ain't broke, break it.

 

[Monty]

And there are those who say "If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is".

 

[Nil]

He (John) posted as above ***This one is a public beta. *** And
BD is a well known Troll who is gullible and is liable to pass
along that the RC is a Beta

I don't know him as a troll or otherwise, but in this case, I think
he's effectively right. It's smart to regard this "Release Candidate"
as a public beta because it is not necessarily final. It would be quite
stupid to apply it to a production system or one that you aren't
prepared to rebuild if things go wrong.

Even if it were final, I recommend recommend that everybody don't apply
service packs right away. XP had some notorious service packs that
broke things and had to be revised. Unless there's some immediately
critical fix or feature that it addressed (not likely), it's a good
idea to wait a while and see how things shake out.

 

[~BD~]

I don't know him as a troll or otherwise, but in this case, I think
he's effectively right. It's smart to regard this "Release Candidate"
as a public beta because it is not necessarily final. It would be quite
stupid to apply it to a production system or one that you aren't
prepared to rebuild if things go wrong.

Even if it were final, I recommend recommend that everybody don't apply
service packs right away. XP had some notorious service packs that
broke things and had to be revised. Unless there's some immediately
critical fix or feature that it addressed (not likely), it's a good
idea to wait a while and see how things shake out.

Thank you for your supportive comments 'Nil'

You may have also noted that I double-checked and posted this link
earlier in this thread in response to DanS:

**

You are, of course, correct!

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle

Thank you for correcting me, Dan. I'm getting muddled in my dotage!

I still think it best for folk to await the final release. Do you?

**

Perhaps, if Mr Foldes disputes what is said by Wikipedia, he should make
the necessary moves to correct said information.

D.

 

[~BD~]

The SP's are a bit more than just a security update, they usually add
new features to the operating system. However, there's no point in
downloading a Release Candidate unless you're willing to be an unpaid
beta tester for Microsoft. I'd say it's better wait for the actual release.

Yousuf Khan

IAWTP

 

[Tom Lake]

?RC stands for 'Release Candidate', last step before final
release.

Typically there is virtually no difference, if any, between RC
and the final release.

The key word is "virtually". Sometimes there *is* a difference.

I still advise my clients to wait for actual release.

Tom Lake

 

[McGoningle]

Is there any particular reason why we should rush to install this?
I'm not terribly well informed, but my impression is that anything
critical in SP1 has already been taken care of by the weekly updates.

I have installed Windows 7 Service Pack 1 RC 1.1 and it works
fine. Although I had to uninstall Roxio Creator 2009 as there was
problem of incompatibility. It take a while, but there was no problem
with installation at all.

 

[Stan Brown]

Even if it were final, I recommend recommend that everybody don't apply
service packs right away. XP had some notorious service packs that
broke things and had to be revised. Unless there's some immediately
critical fix or feature that it addressed (not likely), it's a good
idea to wait a while and see how things shake out.

Thanks, Nil. That's kind of what I thought, and I appreciate the
confirmation.

 

[Peter Foldes]

I don't know him as a troll or otherwise, but in this case, I think
he's effectively right. It's smart to regard this "Release Candidate"
as a public beta because it is not necessarily final. It would be quite
stupid to apply it to a production system or one that you aren't
prepared to rebuild if things go wrong.

Even if it were final, I recommend recommend that everybody don't apply
service packs right away. XP had some notorious service packs that
broke things and had to be revised. Unless there's some immediately
critical fix or feature that it addressed (not likely), it's a good
idea to wait a while and see how things shake out.

Nil

I am sorry but I do beg to differ. A Release Candidate is not a Beta anymore it is
the first release after Beta. It was always like that and it is still that.

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[SC Tom]

And there are those who say "If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is".

If it ain't broke, re-engineer it!

 

[Bob I]

And there are those who say "If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is".

I prefer to use this one.

Optimize: The process of converting a working computer into a door stop.

 

[Nil]

I am sorry but I do beg to differ. A Release Candidate is not a
Beta anymore it is the first release after Beta. It was always
like that and it is still that.

You can beg all you want, but the fact remains that a Release Candidate
is not final, that it can be and often is revised, that it's not made
available to the general public, that it's put out there in hope of
testers finding problems or bugs, and that anyone who applies it to a
production system is taking a big chance. Microsoft doesn't call it a
beta any more, but it looks just like one.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

You can beg all you want, but the fact remains that a Release Candidate
is not final, that it can be and often is revised, that it's not made
available to the general public, that it's put out there in hope of
testers finding problems or bugs, and that anyone who applies it to a
production system is taking a big chance. Microsoft doesn't call it a
beta any more, but it looks just like one.

How about thinking of it as a gamma? AFAIK, it's not a standard usage,
but IMO it's a reasonable metaphor for what an RC is.

 

[Stan Brown]

You can beg all you want, but the fact remains that a Release Candidate
is not final, that it can be and often is revised, that it's not made
available to the general public, that it's put out there in hope of
testers finding problems or bugs, and that anyone who applies it to a
production system is taking a big chance. Microsoft doesn't call it a
beta any more, but it looks just like one.

Well, yes. But then so is every bit of released Microsoft software,
without exception.

In the olden days when I was a full-time software developer, anyone
who suggested releasing a piece of software with the *intention* of
releasing multiple bug fixes every week would have found himself out
of a job. Yet Microsoft has sold us on the idea hat this is
acceptable software quality.

Microsoft is not a software company, it's a company that is very very
good at marketing marginally functional software.

 

[John Aldred]

~BD~ wrote:

[Snip]

Peter may have a TechNet subscription and that's why that particular
link. We had a subscription where I was working, and all of the IT/IS
people got notifications of this type, along with the CD's and other
goodies. That was a few years ago- I don't know if MS still does that
or not. Wasn't a cost I wanted to incur after retirement

Thanks for that Tom.

Have you *any* idea why Windows Live comes into play?

It would seem that Microsoft require users of many of their services to
be registered and log in with their Windows Live ID. It's the same ID
that I use to gain access to the discussion forums on
social.technet microsoft.com/forums

The forums here are not restricted to TechNet subscribers and nor is the
download of SP1 RC. This one is a public beta.

To download it you will have to undergo the Genuine Windows Validation
check.

John

RC is out of Beta and it is a prelease version which will not have any
changes made to it when released as Gold. You can take my word for that.

Beta is a Beta and RC (Release Candidate) is past the Beta change. Please
John do not feed wrong information especially to gullible persons like BD.

I chose my words carefully when I referred to this RC as a public beta.

I wished to emphasize that it was available to the public and not just to
TechNet subscribers as some were suggesting.

Also it is not to be considered as the final version, or entirely free of
bugs.

This version, available to the public, may be labeled as a Release
Candidate, but I expect testing will still be underway in the Microsoft beta
testers group. The RC usually goes through a series of builds RC1, RC1
Refresh etc before RTM.

If you follow the link that you posted, and login with your Live ID, you
will eventually end up at the download page

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...e6-4056-4059-8a1b-3a9b77cdfdda&displaylang=en

If you look at the paragraph entitled "Instructions", you will see the
Microsoft, themselves, refer to this as a public beta.

 

[Nil]

Well, yes. But then so is every bit of released Microsoft
software, without exception.

So is every piece of commodity software by everyone, without exception.
There has never been software of any significant complexity that has
not had a bug and could not be improved.

In the olden days when I was a full-time software developer,
anyone who suggested releasing a piece of software with the
*intention* of releasing multiple bug fixes every week would have
found himself out of a job. Yet Microsoft has sold us on the idea
hat this is acceptable software quality.

Any company who waited until their product was 100% free of any
possible bugs would never have released the product and would therefore
be out of a job. This is not Microsoft's idea, this is the real world

Microsoft is not a software company, it's a company that is very
very good at marketing marginally functional software.

Horseradish.

 

[Nil]

How about thinking of it as a gamma? AFAIK, it's not a standard
usage, but IMO it's a reasonable metaphor for what an RC is.

All that tells us is that it's (maybe) further refined than the rawest
betas. You can call whatever you want, but I believe it should still be
treated as if it were beta software. I doubt Microsoft will accept
responsibly and provide support for issues associated with anything
earlier than the official release.

 

[Peter Foldes]

You can beg all you want, but the fact remains that a Release Candidate
is not final, that it can be and often is revised, that it's not made
available to the general public, that it's put out there in hope of
testers finding problems or bugs, and that anyone who applies it to a
production system is taking a big chance. Microsoft doesn't call it a
beta any more, but it looks just like one.

Nil

I stand by what I said.

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[kevpan815]

YOU DO REALIZE THAT THIS IS NOT MEANT 4 HOME USERS, AS NUMBER 1. IT HAS
A TIME BOMB, AND NUMBER 2. YOU NEED 2 UNINSTALL IT BEFORE YOU WILL BE
ABLE 2 INSTALL RELEASE TO WEB SOME TIME NEXT YEAR, AND FINALLY NUMBER 3.
RUNNING CERTAIN SYSTEM CLEANER'S DELETES THE UNINSTALL FILES 4 THE
SERVICE PACK ON YOUR SYSTEM, DON'T YOU PETER? IF NOT THEN, JUST FYI!