“Can I slipstream Windows Vista SP1 into an existing install image?”
Nope. Well, not directly, anyway.
“Um.. but when I get SP1, I want to upgrade my deployable .WIM images with the new bits. I can’t do that in an offline way like I can with other updates?”
Sorry. No.
“Are you going to tell me why?”
Absolutely! You don’t think I would have opened up this nasty can of worms without giving you a good explanation, did you?
“Well…”
Okay. So here’s the deal**. And those of you who have experienced the SP1 installation have experienced this as well. When you do the SP1 installation, even if it’s from Windows Update (when available), you’re going to see your machine shutdown and restart on it’s own several times. That’s to be expected.
See, there’s this important part of the OS known as the “servicing layer” in Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008. This is the part of the OS that allows for easy update installation with minimal disruptions, allows for an update to be applied to an offline captured image that’s within a .wim file, among other things.
Well.. let’s say that that servicing layer ALSO needed to be updated? What then?
“Oh.. I get it. You can’t update the thing that makes the updates happen smoothly, because the thing that makes updates go smoothly is itself being updated!”
Bingo. You got it. So hopefully the news that you can’t just do an offline upgrade to an image .WIM file won’t be too tragic.
“So.. what do I do instead?”
You are going to have to install your image to a machine. Install the Service Pack. Then re-capture the image.
“Simple!”
Not so simple. There are additional steps that involve some cleanup once you’ve sysprepped your newly updated SP1 machine. Detailed steps are available in the new WAIK documentation.
“Won’t I lose a valuable re-arm to my image when I apply the service pack this way?”
No. SP1 grants you an additional re-arm. We don’t want you to be penalized for having to generalize a system that additional time.
“Wait.. there’s a new WAIK?”
If you’re using the WAIK (Windows Automated Installation Kit), you will definitely want to get the new version that has support for both the original Vista as well as the new servicing layer that’s in both Windows Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008.
Of course, the easiest way to do this all would be to get a copy pre-slipstreamed SP1 version of Windows Vista from Microsoft when it becomes available, and start with that as your new installation base. If you’re not doing any other custom image management, that’s definitely the easiest solution. Just add it to your own Microsoft Deployment workbench or use it to build your new images from there.
—
** I can never say “here’s the deal” without thinking of former teammate-turned-security-guru, Kai “the Security Guy” Axford.
Absolutely Full of I.T. 
BAD news you think , not really : you can't just do an offline upgrade to an image .WIM file because
LikeLike
That is disappointing. Especially when one of the biggest things MS touted about the new .wim imaging system was its flat-file nature and not having to image down to a workstation every time you want to add an update or driver to it. Out comes the first big update (SP1) and not only do we get a "its RTM but you cannot have it for a month" we also get a "no-slipstream for you!" (Best soup nazi voice) 🙂
Fun times indeed!
LikeLike
I agree that the messaging wasn’t as clear as it could/should have been. But apparently there has never been an official claim that offline update would support service packs. It’s still a good solution for all other updates.
And as for SP1 availability – watch this space. There is an announcement coming soon. 🙂
-Kevin
LikeLike
Way back when, one of the touted benefits of Windows Vista was that then-future updates, including service
LikeLike
Yet another thing that makes me want to stick with XP. Wake me when vista has offline integration.
LikeLike
You haven’t been paying attention. I thought the reason you couldn’t do it with a service pack was a pretty good one. You’re really going to stick with XP – where you absolutely have to re-build all your images, install the packs, and then re-image, for EVERY LITTLE OS OR DRIVER UPDATE?
Sorry to sound harsh here, but when people make comments like they’re going to "stick with XP" for some functionality that is STILL WAY BETTER than XP ever could do, it looks like the commentor should do some more research. Or read my blog posts more carefully. 🙂
LikeLike
Any indicators as to when there will be a pre-slipstreamed SP1 copy of Vista available?
–Philip
LikeLike
I’m assuming SP2 will be the same thing…needs to update the engine right? Kind of makes the whole WIM feature useless IMHO. Layer upon layer of complication is what it seems to be, but I’m obviously not an engineer who can explain these things away. I’m just a typical admin for a helpdesk who can’t understand for the life of me how all this great technology helps me in any way present any ROI to my users.
LikeLike
Maybe I’m a bit confused why this is bothering so many people….. can’t the SP1 be integrated in a VM?
LikeLike
soZexy (love your handle) – its’ not about VMs. It’s the same in VMs or real machines. The problem is whether or not an image of Vista can be upgraded, using new functionality (nobody else, and not XP) has around upgrading offline installations even while they’re in a .WIM file.
Folks- again, forgive me if I’m being harsh with some of you – but I don’t think this is a big a set-back as some of you seem to think it is. SPs are a different animal. This one happened to mean upgrading the very functionality that makes offline updates possible. I know that a big part of that is to keep Windows Vista’s servicing identical to what also shipped in Windows Server 2008 – not coincidentally on the very same day that SP1 RTM’d. Will it happen in SP2? It might. It might not. But I do know that most people prefer a product to be IMPROVED, with as little disruption as possible. SPs don’t happen that often. Off-line updates for the vast majority of updates will and do work really well. Do they work in XP? No. They NEVER worked in XP. It was never a feature of XP. I could go on and on about the benefits of Vista around imaging and deployment and updates that are saving so many companies so much time (and big $$s). Believe me – most of those people are not unhappy they moved to Vista.
What’s also funny (and at the same time, sad) to me is – we were transparent. We gave you information that other companies would have held back. SP1 is "done". The code is not going to be changed. Should we have waited to announce that, just because there are drivers out there (and believe me, it’s actually a VERY small number of drivers – like seven out of 70,000) that have a problem with SP1? The reaction to that news leads me to believe that sometimes being transparent can cause a few people to get bend-out-of-shape. And in the blogasphere as well as the media, bad news travels faster than good news.
I would like to believe that people are more reasonable than that. And I also sincerly SINCERELY hope that the reactions this whole episode has created will not cause our product teams to hold back information in the future. If we want to choose between HONEST, or LOVED, I think we would like to try and achieve both. But it doesn’t always work out that way. So I prefer HONEST. Hopefully the LOVE comes out of respect and appreciation for the former.
-Kevin
LikeLike
"SPs are a different animal. This one happened to mean upgrading the very functionality that makes offline updates possible."
Why? Why are SP’s a different animal? All they should be is a collection of hotfixes and patches. In this case, they are 500+ of these all rolled into one.
In any case, I’m sure there are great reasons for this. I’m sure there is a great reason why the core needs to be updated. I’m sure there are great reasons why previous drivers that worked need to be reinstalled after Service Packs. I’m sure there is a fantastic reason why it requires an hour to replace a few thousand files on a computer. I’m sure there is a great reason why the fetch data could not be reused and it has to take days to rebuild. I’m sure there is a great reason why a computer needs to reboot 3 or 4 times to install a service pack.
Yep…those are all probably great reasons. The only question I have is, with all of these great reasons, why is it continually beoming harder and harder for me to manage my end users with the functionality, transparency, and reliability we had with XP? SP1 is a downright work-stopping process that slows the computer down for days. This is the exact opposite of efficiency.
I’ll have to wait and see what the WIM/slipsteaming process ends up to be in the end, all I can say is that for Service Pack 1…THE MOST CRITICAL SERVICE PACK Microsoft has ever released…the process is kludgy and complicated and is still trying to fix major core problems with the Vista RTM. This SP1 should have been slick, easy, and gobs of options should be available. What we are finding is that, yet again, Microsoft has gone off and discovered some new cool technology that they will most likely dump in the next version of Windows that is supposed to make our lives easier, but is so complicated, changes already established methods, and has so many dependencies that it actually accompished the opposite when placed into the real world.
LikeLike
"And I also sincerly SINCERELY hope that the reactions this whole episode has created will not cause our product teams to hold back information in the future."
Is that supposed to be some kind of threat? What is this glorious information you’ve given us that you won’t be giving us next time if we continue to tell you how poorly this whole SP1 issue has been handled? Is it that next time you won’t tell us ANY method to integrate the Service Packs? We’re barely getting ANY information as it is. We’re all scrambling to even figure out this SP1 mess…and yes, IT’S A MESS!!!!!
Brilliant plan. Threaten us. Glad your our "advocate" on these matters.
LikeLike
Linux-Ubuntu only required 20 minutes and one reboot to update everything including the applications (OpenOffice, FireFox, WINE, etc). There’s also a number of nice wizards to facilitate slipstreaming all patches for deployment in the enterprise. It’s been this way for a number of years. It’s amazing how primitive Linux must be architecturally compared to Vista. Wow.
LikeLike
I wrote about this approximately a week ago,saying that I could not understand why SP1 can not be slipstreamed
LikeLike
I wrote about this approximately a week ago,saying that I could not understand why SP1 can not be slipstreamed
LikeLike
Kevin,
If you think this is no big deal, why don’t you come over to my company and help me re-image the 20 desktop and laptops loads with SP1 for testing? I’m not trying to knock y’all, but having to update the core WIM via this re-imaging method should never have been let out the door. There should have been an alternate and easier method presented to us in the field even if it was a separate Resource Kit tool. I can’t believe for one second that Microsoft internally has taken the route of re-imaging and re-deploying their desktops to upgrade to SP1 as you mention above.
My 2 cents.
LikeLike
This reminds me of the daylight savings patches we had last year for email. The toolset was terrible. There were like 40 updates to the Technet article within the first month. We helped support many companies who were confused and scared about the whole process. In the end we got them working, mostly, with a number of appointments still not working right. We squarely blame the tool. If you guys (microsoft) had spent just a little more time on the toolset you could have saved tens of thousands of hours for those of us in the field actually doing the work. It was a shoddy effort on microsofts part.
Likewise if you had spent just a little more time and asked us what we wanted instead of making internal decisions and telling us how you we aregoing to do it then we would have a great toolset to manage vista updates. As it is, we have a crappy toolset that barely accomplished the task. Its impossible to fathom how after all the bad press around vista that microsoft allows such a shoody service pack to be let loose into the wild. Sometimes I think you guys are completely nuts at times. Most of this could be avoided if you would get off your high horses and stop getting "harsh with some of you" and start listening to us for a change. Not releasing it to the development and consulting communities further emphasizes the divide and problem with microsoft today and the sorry state vista is currently in.
LikeLike
"Believe me – most of those people are not unhappy they moved to Vista."
I don’t. The VAST majority of people I talk to on a daily basis can’t stand Vista.
"we were transparent."
Absolutely not. You are kidding yourself.
"I also sincerly SINCERELY hope that the reactions this whole episode has created will not cause our product teams to hold back information in the future."
Um, what is THAT supposed to mean?
LikeLike
am i missing something here?
is ms’ excuse that sp1 can’t be slipstreamed because of how the ‘updater layer’ on a *running/live* system has to be updated? wtf does that have to do with updating a default static installation image (e.g. an original oem or retail dvd image)?
maybe i need to re-read the article yet again, but from what i’m gathering ms completely avoided answering why sp1 can’t be slipstreamed.
my guess is that because they switched to a ‘ghost’ style installation image they either don’t have a clue how to do it or couldn’t be bothered to spend the time/money to include that capability in the sp1 package. to be fair, it’s probably the latter…and likely that the sp would probably end up being nearly twice the size because (shakes magic eight ball) of sunspots.
LikeLike
Re-image computers? Has MS gone mad? I thought this was THE critical service pack that we’ve all been waiting for that was supposed to speed adoption of Vista to the masses. Oh, wait. It is.
How am I supposed to do this? I can’t duplicate ALL the hardware we have in the field in our labs! Was ANYONE outside of MS asked about this issue? We have real problems to solve out here not play spin the bottle games on how to deploy a bloody service pack! We can’t keep playing the "oh no-what the hell has ms changed yet again in the way we do things as a business" model.
I hear the torrents already have it slipstreamed. Might take a look mateys.
LikeLike
Hmmmm. This isn’t exactly the method I was hoping for. Isn’t there just a way to return our current RTM disks for new slipstreamed ones from Microsoft? Loading, patching, creating ISOs, VMs, ugh. This was all supposed to be easier than it was with XP, which it is according to Keith above for most patches (and you people are being too hard on him for this IMO. He didn’t write the code), but service packs shoudl be the same and I don’t care if it is replacing whatever component that updates some other component or what ever else the problem is. Service pack 1 for Vista should have been much easier than this and I suspect this will be another (hopefully minor, but still existing nonetheless) roadblock to Vista adoption. Comeon guys, Vista isn’t THAT bad. It’s not the seventh wonder of the world we were all sold, but it’s not like a steaming pile of dog doo doo I’ve been hearing.
LikeLike
hmm…wouldn’t it be cool and elegant if finally Microsoft simply gave the opportunity for users to provide their license number – could be done on a secure channel, https, whatever – and download a pre-slipstreamed SP1 DVD iso in return ? just give me a good reason why this couldn’t be done ??? piracy paranoia ??? license numbers are trusted at installation time with a physical Vista DVD, why wouldn’t they be trusted in a secure online transaction ??? Online activation + WGA would still be required after the new installation so what’s the problem ??? the idea of a DVD exchange sounds good as well.
LikeLike
and don’t tell me that there would be a risk that product keys could be stolen during an online transaction of that sort; I never heard anything happened during an activation process in the past. It could be just as secure as that – for the end user as well as for Microsoft.
LikeLike
Love the passion! But perhaps a few of you have missed some key improvements in Vista…
To the person(s) concerned about having to re-image all their machines: Huh? Who has to do that? If you’re taking advantage of Vista’s ability to have a single image that installs on any hardware that supports it, you’ve only got that one image to update.
To the person(s) wondering about when a full, SP1-included slipstreamed version of Vista will be available – the answer is "soon".
To the person(s) hoping to get a copy of that download as a benefit of having the license – that’s absolutely what Volume Licensing will let you do. You will (or you may already have by the time you see this) the ability to download the full Vista-with-SP1 DVD image.
And specifically to "ScottBarnett, MCSE, CCIE" – It wasn’t a threat at all, Scott. And yes, I sincerely try to be your advocate. Do I think SP1 should have RTM’d when it did? Absolutely. But should we have announced it? My opinion – I’m not so sure. Remember – I’m not on the product team, so I don’t have all the answers one way or another – but again, it goes back to this question: Do you want Microsoft to be honest with you, or do you want to remain blissfully ignorant of Microsoft is doing? Communication screw-ups aside, I think most people prefer working with an an honest company.
LikeLike
I agree. Can’t we just upload our exisiting code and download the new slipstreamed version. I’m not going to image a desktop, apply the SP, etc. That’s just too much work. If Microsoft won’t provide it, then I’ll just find it on one of the thousands (literally) of torrent seeds out there. Again, MS is dropping the ball.
Did I hear something about Microsoft being an honest company? HIL-AR-I-OUS! Which issue are you referring to? The Vista-capable debacle going on right now where even Mike Nash couldn’t get his $2100 laptop working right for anything other than e-mail and felt duped himself? How about the Ultimate extras we all paid $100 extra for that have been forgotten and frankly should be another major lawsuit IMO? What about all the EU lawsuits that MS has LOST? How about the search engine that MS has continually tried to make proprietary? How about MS’s being honest with us and telling us what happened with the whole SP release debacle. They won’t tell us you say? Gee, what a surprise. The honesty is simply staggering. I could go on and on. Seriously, Kevin, you stretch your credibility to the breaking point.
In any case, I don’t remember anyone questioning the honesty of Microsoft in this blog. All I notice is a bunch of MCSE’s, MSDN Users, and other technical folk who think this non-slipstreaming idea sucks big time. They don’t feel anyone outside of Microsoft was queried on this issue before we were all presented with the already determined outcome. Are we a wee bit paranoid Kevin? Regardless of whether your customers are right, their perception of the problem still exists. You can continue to hide in your hole and claim ms is being mistreated, but we feel ms has mistreated us.
At this point, perhaps it IS better that we remain blissfully ignorant to MS’s next moves. We can’t understand them as it is. I would also really like to hear, as a number of posters asked, what information you are not willing to share next time if we don’t do things the way King Kevin wants us to and be happy with the dorky method of imaging desktops versus a simple slipstream method.
Microsoft is like any other company. They exist to make money. Honesty be damned. If you want MS to be honest, why don’t you first explain to us in understandable language why I pay $500 per year to get software 2+ weeks after it’s RTM’d with a code freeze? That’s not honest. That’s manipulative. That’s how I feel. MS manipulated us and is slinking in their hole to dodge the storm until this latest boneheaded decision blows over. You want us to be honest too? Well, there you go. Now it’s your turn.
Honesty and Microsoft. I actually chuckled a bit when I read that.
LikeLike
An honest Microsoft? You can’t be serious. Are you referring to Windows being stolen pretty much hands-down from Apple or are you referring to the snaeky handling of the Borland developers? Have you no clue as to all of the underhanded dishonest tactics Microsoft has used? The Vista marketing campaign ALONE shows a level of dishonesty that’s undeniable. Microsoft has based their foundation on ripping off other ideas and monopolizing the markets. Please just admit you’re another Microsoft stooge and be done with it. There is help out there for people like you. We’ll still like you.
🙂
LikeLike
"You are going to have to install your image to a machine. Install the Service Pack. Then re-capture the image….Not so simple. There are additional steps that involve some cleanup once you’ve sysprepped your newly updated SP1 machine. Detailed steps are available in the new WAIK documentation."
Kevin, do you know of any additional toolsets coming out or is this really the only way to do this? I don’t have MSDN and I’m with a smaller company, so I may just have to "borrow"’ a slipstreamed version from elsewhere if you get my drift. I’m assuming this is only for new installations and won’t be THAT big of a deal for most people, but for some with only the RTM version available it could be a deal breaker as the above suggested method is probably what most people will not do.
I see you are taking quite a bit of heat for non-related issues and I think everyone on this forum needs to understand this is a discussion about slipstreaming, not a forum to vent your frustrations with Microsoft or Vista in general. That said, your comment about Microsoft being an honest company and being transparent with us isn’t sitting quite right with me either. Whatever. Let’s get this back on track.
LikeLike
Kevin, we’re just going to throw our original DVD’s in the trash and just download the integrated version via pirate bay? No one with half a brain is going to do the method you described for something that can just be obtained otherwise in an hour of downloading for a tenth of the effort.
This is yet another lame method fix yet another lame symptom of the Vista disaster just like the kill switch was. I’ve been in the computer consulting business over 15 years now and this kind of continual poor thinking and continual self back-patting by MNicrosoft employees makes me want to just scream and run out and buy a Mac. You guys aren’t solving real-world problems anymore, you are just throwing technology out and seeing what sticks. With Vista, you have an incredible talent for constantly hitting fan blades.
LikeLike
This is all a big joke right? So the brilliant minds at Microsoft designed a new patching method that breaks the previous patching method. To add insult to injury, they did this with the most important software relase of the century-namely Vista SP1 Release to Manufacturing. They thought the previous way of slipstreaming just wasn’t complicated enough and change must happen for change sake.
Let me outline what Microsoft is suggesting here:
1. Take our original DVD’s of Vista.
2. Find a comparable hardware laying around for all hardware types
3. Load Vista.
4. Wait for hours.
5. Load the Service pack
6. Wait for hours.
7. Load up all the other drivers and patches.
8. Fix all the new problems the new SP introduces
9. Download a 1.6 GB WAIK package.
10. Contemplate why you are continuing with this process.
11. Spend hours pouring over the documentation.
12. Spend hours getting WAIK installed with all the .NET references
13. Trial and erro until finally, voila! A shiney new ISO image.
14. Rinse, recycle, repeat for every computer type.
oh, I forgot step 15. Bag all this and download it from a pirate site.
This has to be the WORST method I’ve ever heard of for patching an operating system yet. Bravo Microsoft, you’ve completely outdone yourself with the most convoluted complicated method I think I’ve ever seen. Absolutely pitiful that this would even have made it out the door. An embarassment for Vista and the whole team who are appparently feeling pretty good about this slop they’ve served us.
This stinks! Bring us back the old slipstreaming method!
LikeLike
forgot step 16. Wonder why your newly patched computer is slower than it was before you patched it and no better (and most likely worse) than it was before you upgraded from XP.
Bad. Wayyyyyyyyyyy bad.
LikeLike
Ohhh c’mom now. This no slipping thing is c-r-a-p!!! How in the name of god, a company that is worth billions and billions of dollars, with tens of thousand on their workforce, with virtually unlimited resources can release unstable service packs for the general public?
LikeLike
"you’ve only got that one image to update."
That right there is incorrect. Applying this method to multiple computers results in multiple outcomes. Out of the three computers I tested this on after running the WAIK the results are:
One computer works fine, except the printer won’t print now.
One of the comptuers seems to boot normal, but is slower than before. We think it’s the prefetch catching up, but it’s been this way for almost a week now. At least it prints.
One computer continually reboots. It appears the HD controller is having problems.
Agree that this method is completely inadequete and seriously prone to errors. I’m not sure if this is just a symptom of SP1 or an issue with the ISO and WAIK I ran, but absolutely the state of Vista is in serious trouble at the moment in my honest opinion and we can’t get the dang thing stable on a majority of systems to save our lives. Some systems Vista works fine. Most have niggling little problems all over the place. A few won’t even boot now. All of them are slower than the users are comfortable with and we can’t afford to deck out every machine with 4 GB of ram just to make Vista work like XP did 5 years ago. That’s the real tragedy.
LikeLike
Pointless. Just download the already slipstreamed version from the tens of thousands of torrents listed on the Pirate Bay and be done with is. Congratulations MS, you’ve turned us all into pirates.
LikeLike
Consider yourselves all lucky.
I’ve tried SP1 twice now. My desktop goes into the endless reboot as others have found:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9063158&intsrc=hm_list
My laptop can’t install the prerequisites for the pre-patches. For some unknown reason, Microsoft requires a separate installation for required patches rather than place them all in the same update. What really sucks is that another patch broke my Media Center and it kept crashing, uninstalling the patch fixes the problem, but SP1 will load that piece of sh#t patch right back on it too I just found out.
Here’s hoping everyone on the Vista team has an absolutely craptastic day. Seriously. Have a craptastic day and I hope you are all fired real soon for this piece of sh!t OS you’ve built.
LikeLike
Has anyone actually tried this method? Installed Vista. Okay. Installed SP1. Disaster. My SATA hard drive suddenly wasn’t recognized and Vista went into a nice boot, fail, reboot. Opened the case, plugged the drive into the secondary SATA port and got it back. That’s definately going to be a problem with a HUGE amount of people IMHO. Also found out that I lost about 5 GB during the upgrade process. WTF? Anyway, did disk cleanups and defrags. Still missing about 2 GB of space I have no idea where it went to.
Moving on, installed the Windows Automated Installation Kit from the suggested web site. Had another WTF moment when I realized it was over a GB in size! RIDICULOUS! In any case, got it installed, ran it and…bam…"error 800451 fault in application". Of course, TechNet, MSDN, nothing has any indication of what this error means.
Already put 10 hours into this process. No more. Either Microsoft makes a download site where I can put my key in and download a new copy with the SP1 slipstreamed or, frankly, they can take Vista and shove it where the sun don’t shine. This is ridiculous for their flagship operating system to have so many boneheaded obstancles we all have to run around just to get it to work.
Honesty and Microsoft huh? Kevin, give me some of what you must be smokin’ cause you are one masochist or something.
I give up. I give up. I GIVE UP!!! Next time I’m buying a Mac, I swear!
LikeLike
FYI, Microsoft has completely suspended the SP1 prerequisites download due to major problems:
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/02/19/update-on-windows-vista-sp1-prerequisite-kb937287.aspx
What a mess.
LikeLike
We ran this tool and created a new image. First deployment killed the previous working Vista RTM touchpad driver on a new 2-week old Dell laptop. Second deployment causes the endless reboot on another 1 month old Dell 1500 series laptop. Calling the number basically resulted in "try booting from the DVD…" Of course, once we mentioned the above imaging method Microsoft simply threw up their arms and suggested we reinstall everything from scratch.
Funny thing, we actually reported this very problem to Microsoft a few months ago during the RC build. I guess they never got around to fixing it.
So we gave it one more shot on a desktop. Everything worked great…until we switched to the second montior. Switching monitors causes Vista to BSOD and reboot every time. Fortunately we fixed this by uninstalling the video driver and reinstalling it…which we also had to do for the print driver.
Needless to say our testing has been brought to a screeching halt until we can obtain a SP1 integrated DVD. I normally don’t use the word "suck", but in this case I’ll make an exception. This sucks.
Did anyone…anyone…ANYONE outside of Microsoft test this in any way?/ This is getting tiresome. I’m spending MORE time fixing my OS than enjoying it. This is a big step-backwards and I hope someone out there is addressing this because we are NOT moving to Vista in this current state.
LikeLike
Wingate ROLLEX. A fine mixture of quality Rollex watch models including men’s & women’s Rollex wattches (also lady Rollex).
LikeLike
Kevin, as far as creating an image, which imaging tools does Microsoft provide so that I can create and burn the ISO? I don’t see any good options in Vista to create the ISO image. I can do it in Nero, but then I’d have to install Nero on the image and I don’t want to do that.
I’m apparently going to have to use this method as we are a smaller business with only about 20 computers. I can’t get a copy from MS apparently unless I agree to sign up for their licensing program first (they want to license 25 computers…5 more than we need…totally lame) and I’m not willing to download a copy from a hacker site.
Thanks.
LikeLike
"You are going to have to install your image to a machine. Install the Service Pack. Then re-capture the image."
There is NO good reason why we can’t just replace files from one directory with newer files from another directory. I’m not the sharpest task in the box, but I’m not stupid either. Does Microsoft think I’m stupid? I want to see the whitepaper detailing how a company ***ANY company*** has used the above method to integrate SP1. Doing a search of google doesn’t pull up any results for me. It just shows the level of pain people are going through trying to get this to work. This method is for the birds. Microsoft, get off your butts and either provide the full download for those who have a valid key or write a slipstream application that can do this. Again, we’re talking about replacing older files with newer files and updating the config files. There is NO EXCUSE for ANY OTHER method.
LikeLike
errrr – task = tack. Sorry for the misspelling
LikeLike
Egads. I was hoping there would be an easy method to the Vista madness once SP1 was released. I see it’s more of the same ill-thought out processes that we’ve seen 1 year ago with the RTM. Nothing seems polished or finished. Everything seems rushed and features are being dropped left and right. Now, slipstreaming has been dropped, there will be multiple versions of an SP that is already months late and still dealing with huge driver problems.
I would really like to meet the developer that can convince me that applying Vista, running the service pack one setup, installing the installation kit, ghosting, and the deploying was a brilliant solution over just slipstreaming. It certainly couldn’t have been easier than just using the same method we’ve all used for years now, right? Is there some major reason for this other than "we did it because we had to fix Vista…again"? That response offers me, the customer, nothing but pain and was obviously the easiest way out (with negative customer benefit) for the developers with the onus falling on the customer. Either way, two thumbs WAY down to whoever made this technical change.
LikeLike
I can’t do WHAT?! Why can’t I create my own slipstreamed installation of Windows Vista SP1? – Full of I.T. – Site Home – TechNet Blogs
LikeLike