Jump to content

Does Vista ever finish installing?


Volatus
 Share

Recommended Posts

So I decided to take the "plunge" and install Vista on a junker computer to give it another worthwhile try after SP1 came out. It took a lot of convincing myself that Vista is worth even glancing at again, after seeing it on ALL new computers and seeing how TERRIBLY SLOW it makes all these potentially blazing-fast PCs... I figure vLite had also come a long way.

Last time I tried Vista on my personal computer, it was right AT Vista launch time, running the RTM version of Vista on a 1.4GHz Pentium-M laptop with 1gb RAM, Radeon 7500 or some crap... and I thought it was kinda cool. But it ended up sucking, very quickly, with broken drivers, horrible performance, etc... and nothing at all was better than XP plus some add-ons.

Now I'm installing Vista again on a 2.7GHz Celeron with 512mb RAM and a 10gb HDD I had laying around. Right off the bat, yes, I know 10gb is small for Vista (why should it be? Vista is a freaking operating system, it should NOT be that big...), but I vLitened it first.

Here's what I've done so far:

Spent about 4 hours downloading SP1 (half an hour) and using vLite to integrate SP1 into the image, then cleaning out the crap NOBODY needs in Vista.

Evidently, 256mb wasn't enough, so I installed 512mb.

Vista's user-input end of the installation process was simple enough. Skipped the serial entry, deleted the XP partition, had it start installing using all the other defaults.

Waited, and waited, and waited. Copying files, installing updates, installing blah... reboot... (1)

Okay... now we're back at copying files. And, finally, completing installation.

Half an hour (or more?) later, it's STILL COMPLETING INSTALLATION.

AN HOUR LATER and it's STILL completing installation?!!!

OKAY, FINALLY, it's rebooted into Windows (2), it seems to be done. Windows is installing files, or something like that.

Cool, this looks familiar! Choose a username... and a password... and an icon... cool. Then a computer name (Vistrash). Then a wallpaper. Sounds cool.

...

... It's a blank desktop. Just... a wallpaper... and a lot of grinding of the hard drive.

... 15 minutes later it's still grinding away at that wallpaper.

FINALLY it puts something on the screen to the effect of "testing your computer's performance".

Random reboot (3). Totally random. No error, no shutdown, just computer rebooted halfway through the "test".

WHAT?! Enter my username AGAIN?! This whole thing AGAIN?! My username is in use?! What is this crap? If it's in use, OBVIOUSLY I DID THIS ALREADY! *slams head into desk*

At least it didn't have the 20 odd minutes of blank desktop this time. Right into, and through, the "test".

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (4) Huh?!

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (5) Wait... I hope it's done THIS time... I've never SEEN an installation need to reboot THIS MANY TIMES...

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (6) Okay... this is strange...

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (7) It's stuck in a loop, isn't it?

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (8) This s*** is just annoying now.

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (9) Damnit, that's it, I'm posting this on MSFN.

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (10) I HATE VISTA.

I hate Vista... as I type, it's on its 11th reboot (or so, I lost count, it just does it automatically).

I'm guessing this isn't normal, but then again, what IS normal anyway? Vista is absolutely the worst operating system I've ever had the displeasure of "beta testing" for Microsoft.

Any advice?

edit: I gave up on the reboot loop just now. Its 13th reboot and I just hit the power button during POST. Screw that crap.

Edited by Volatus
Link to comment
Share on other sites


So I decided to take the "plunge" and install Vista on a junker computer to give it another worthwhile try after SP1 came out. It took a lot of convincing myself that Vista is worth even glancing at again, after seeing it on ALL new computers and seeing how TERRIBLY SLOW it makes all these potentially blazing-fast PCs... I figure vLite had also come a long way.

Last time I tried Vista on my personal computer, it was right AT Vista launch time, running the RTM version of Vista on a 1.4GHz Pentium-M laptop with 1gb RAM, Radeon 7500 or some crap... and I thought it was kinda cool. But it ended up sucking, very quickly, with broken drivers, horrible performance, etc... and nothing at all was better than XP plus some add-ons.

Now I'm installing Vista again on a 2.7GHz Celeron with 512mb RAM and a 10gb HDD I had laying around. Right off the bat, yes, I know 10gb is small for Vista (why should it be? Vista is a freaking operating system, it should NOT be that big...), but I vLitened it first.

Here's what I've done so far:

Spent about 4 hours downloading SP1 (half an hour) and using vLite to integrate SP1 into the image, then cleaning out the crap NOBODY needs in Vista.

Evidently, 256mb wasn't enough, so I installed 512mb.

Vista's user-input end of the installation process was simple enough. Skipped the serial entry, deleted the XP partition, had it start installing using all the other defaults.

Waited, and waited, and waited. Copying files, installing updates, installing blah... reboot... (1)

Okay... now we're back at copying files. And, finally, completing installation.

Half an hour (or more?) later, it's STILL COMPLETING INSTALLATION.

AN HOUR LATER and it's STILL completing installation?!!!

OKAY, FINALLY, it's rebooted into Windows (2), it seems to be done. Windows is installing files, or something like that.

Cool, this looks familiar! Choose a username... and a password... and an icon... cool. Then a computer name (Vistrash). Then a wallpaper. Sounds cool.

...

... It's a blank desktop. Just... a wallpaper... and a lot of grinding of the hard drive.

... 15 minutes later it's still grinding away at that wallpaper.

FINALLY it puts something on the screen to the effect of "testing your computer's performance".

Random reboot (3). Totally random. No error, no shutdown, just computer rebooted halfway through the "test".

WHAT?! Enter my username AGAIN?! This whole thing AGAIN?! My username is in use?! What is this crap? If it's in use, OBVIOUSLY I DID THIS ALREADY! *slams head into desk*

At least it didn't have the 20 odd minutes of blank desktop this time. Right into, and through, the "test".

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (4) Huh?!

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (5) Wait... I hope it's done THIS time... I've never SEEN an installation need to reboot THIS MANY TIMES...

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (6) Okay... this is strange...

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (7) It's stuck in a loop, isn't it?

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (8) This s*** is just annoying now.

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (9) Damnit, that's it, I'm posting this on MSFN.

"Installing Service Pack: stage 3 of 3 - 0... 99... 100% Complete. Please do not turn off your computer."

"Shutting down..." *reboot* (10) I HATE VISTA.

I hate Vista... as I type, it's on its 11th reboot (or so, I lost count, it just does it automatically).

I'm guessing this isn't normal, but then again, what IS normal anyway? Vista is absolutely the worst operating system I've ever had the displeasure of "beta testing" for Microsoft.

Any advice?

edit: I gave up on the reboot loop just now. Its 13th reboot and I just hit the power button during POST. Screw that crap.

oh man..sucks for you...i was just gonna install SP1..but i guess ill chill on that for a little longer..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well i have never seen that tough i havent tested sp1 yet well its not normal for ordinary vista atleast but as i said i dont know about sp1 write it here if you happen to find out something (if you now other searching)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah SP1 take a long time to install...If I remember right mine took 1 to 1 1/2 hours to install. And the worst part was that I could not use my computer like you can with Windows Xps service packs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thing is, I wasn't installing it. It was pre-installed.

If you notice, I also say it keeps rebooting, over and over and over and over and over... it processes something (at "100% completed" the whole time) for about 5 minutes then reboots back to doing the same thing over and over.

Isn't that a problem?

edit: May be related to this: http://www.msfn.org/board/Vlite-116-Vista-SP1-t114712.html

Edited by Volatus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate Vista... as I type, it's on its 11th reboot (or so, I lost count, it just does it automatically).

I'm guessing this isn't normal, but then again, what IS normal anyway? Vista is absolutely the worst operating system I've ever had the displeasure of "beta testing" for Microsoft.

So you slipstreamed the full Vista SP1 into an RTM build (not recommended, use WU or a SP1 intergrated disc) and removed pieces of the OS and installed it on a machine that barely qualifies for that OS's requirements and you are blaming the OS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I fully place the blame on Windows Vista.

Know why?

XP never had even CLOSE to issues like this. Hell, XP can recover and be in a usable state even after removing the disc halfway through Windows setup. XP's setup is bulletproof, although it still had its problems. They were nothing near as bad a problem as not even being able to use the computer because an official service pack wouldn't install on the version of Windows it was designed to upgrade.

The hardware I used is absolutely nowheres near a problem. It would be a problem and I would have no complaints if it failed to install on an old P3 system I've got laying around.

If there is a problem, Windows should TELL ME about the problem instead of hiding it all behind a fancy facade of automation. Automation is what made Vista so terrible as it is - setting all your defaults wrong and assuming everyone is completely idiotic. Many software installers have a "custom" mode for a reason - a reason MS totally forgot about with Vista - to make life easier on those of us that like to know what's going on.

It IS Vista's problem. It's not even nuhi's problem, because his software shouldn't have to beat around MS's glitchy installers. Please tell me why MS made it even MORE difficult to slipstream a service pack now? It was easy to do with XP, and is something that's even become routine. Instead of making it easier to do, they seem to have completely screwed it up. Nobody ever told me that problems like this would occur "if" I did "this" or "that". All the pieces fit together and now I'm left with a jumbled pile of crap.

And you can't deny that Vista doesn't inexplicably take an unnecessarily long time to "complete installation" or sit at the desktop background for 15 odd minutes. It does that on any computer. MS should have put more time into that little-known area of the company previously known as "quality assurance" (which is now, I'm guessing, known as "the break room")...

edit: Also, more on your point... RTM is the OFFICIAL BUILD. RTM is what SP1 should be built onto. I actually intentionally seeked out an unmodified retail disc in order to slipstream and install it, as it didn't have any additional crap built onto it that would break installation. Installing a service pack onto an already-installed copy of Windows is just asking for trouble, especially one already v/nLitened. So with that common knowledge, I installed SP1 onto the image, then removed the crap Vista shouldn't've come with - in particular, speech support, natural language search, and LANGUAGES. After this edit, I'll attach my vLite settings file too.

Last_Session.ini

Edited by Volatus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I fully place the blame on Windows Vista.

Know why?

XP never had even CLOSE to issues like this. Hell, XP can recover and be in a usable state even after removing the disc halfway through Windows setup. XP's setup is bulletproof, although it still had its problems. They were nothing near as bad a problem as not even being able to use the computer because an official service pack wouldn't install on the version of Windows it was designed to upgrade.

Installing Vista on the machine then installing the service pack has no issues, either from the full SP or from Windows Update. Using an intergrated Vista SP1 intergrated disk (already intergrated from MS) has no isues either. I agree there should be a way to slipstream an SP into a image for those who want to do this to keep their images up to date. I would bet at some time the WAIK will be update to do this. for most people though, downloading the ~48 meg update from windows update will be the easiest solution (when i say most people i mean non computer people :))

The hardware I used is absolutely nowheres near a problem. It would be a problem and I would have no complaints if it failed to install on an old P3 system I've got laying around.

what is the FSB on the Celeron? 533? how fast is the ram?333, 533, 400? how fast is the HD? 5,400rpm? 7,200rpm? the machine for the most part meets the minimum requirements for Vista (depending on what version you are running) 512 of ram is the absolute minimum you can use and even then you are going to run into troubles. even with a gig of slow memory you are not going to get good preformance.

If there is a problem, Windows should TELL ME about the problem instead of hiding it all behind a fancy facade of automation. Automation is what made Vista so terrible as it is - setting all your defaults wrong and assuming everyone is completely idiotic. Many software installers have a "custom" mode for a reason - a reason MS totally forgot about with Vista - to make life easier on those of us that like to know what's going on.

It IS Vista's problem. It's not even nuhi's problem, because his software shouldn't have to beat around MS's glitchy installers. Please tell me why MS made it even MORE difficult to slipstream a service pack now? It was easy to do with XP, and is something that's even become routine. Instead of making it easier to do, they seem to have completely screwed it up. Nobody ever told me that problems like this would occur "if" I did "this" or "that". All the pieces fit together and now I'm left with a jumbled pile of crap.

And you can't deny that Vista doesn't inexplicably take an unnecessarily long time to "complete installation" or sit at the desktop background for 15 odd minutes. It does that on any computer. MS should have put more time into that little-known area of the company previously known as "quality assurance" (which is now, I'm guessing, known as "the break room")...

Sadly automation is what the masses look for, they don't want to have to enter every setting and adjust every value to get their computer working. they just want to get their computer and have it work. The very small number people who know every setting they want to configure is not Microsoft's target audience, the business and consumer markets is what MS aims for, not the enthusiasts. If you install vista RTM, then upgrade with SP1 from the full install or Windows update it is going to work. By chance it does not work, you will get logs that can looked to find out why your installation failed. Since you have edited to consitancy of the orignal files now windows cannot tell you what error has occured because it is not expected. windows expects files to be there and when they are not there, or are changed (vlited) then you lose that ability to troubleshoot the problem. My installtation of Vista 64 bit SP1 took about 15 minutes to install total, this was from putting in the DVD to entering my username and password.

You are right though, they should released tool at the same time as launch for SP1 to intergrate into the image, granted that they redid the entire imaging process i am sure this is still being looked at as the SP has to be able to examine the image it is intergrating into and check for how many images are on the WIM, what versions they are, and then intergrate based on that. Not as simple as it was with XP. Give it time and i would be the WAIK will be able to intergrate at some point.

edit: Also, more on your point... RTM is the OFFICIAL BUILD. RTM is what SP1 should be built onto. I actually intentionally seeked out an unmodified retail disc in order to slipstream and install it, as it didn't have any additional crap built onto it that would break installation. Installing a service pack onto an already-installed copy of Windows is just asking for trouble, especially one already v/nLitened. So with that common knowledge, I installed SP1 onto the image, then removed the crap Vista shouldn't've come with - in particular, speech support, natural language search, and LANGUAGES. After this edit, I'll attach my vLite settings file too.

Again installing Vista RTM, then installing the Service Pack results in no issues or issues that can be troubleshot. Again problems occur when you alter the OS in way that it is no longer able insure it's integrity. When you start altering your OS you do that with the knowledge that you are possibly setting your self up for issues in the future releases. To each his own with what vista should come. Seeing as at work we deploy a vista image internationally i enjoy the fact that Language and speech supports are already there for us to use. it makes our job much easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply put, not every single person that runs Vista needs all the languages of the world consuming 1.4gb of space. MS should be smarter than that, to have it filter out (or at least ASK) what language(s) people want to use, if even more than one. As it is, MS is forcing all this junk on everyone's computers... hell, XP already does this to a lesser extent, but at least it only provides the ability to display such things, as opposed to 1.4gb of "international support". *shakes fist*

I guess the bloat epidemic began with Windows Installer and its obsessive "protection" system - keeping a copy of the flippin' installer sitting on the hard drive and corrupting the program if you opt to remove it manually. Now Vista itself is built around the same "redundancy" system, causing all sorts of problems for people that actually want control over their systems. If MS didn't want people to modify Windows, they should have made Windows customizable like they did in the old days of '95 (to at least an extent). Hell, the fact that they don't even ask basic questions like "do you really need all these languages installed?" - questions on the same basic level as time zone and clock settings (which I often leave as default, being in the default Pacific time zone) - shows MS doesn't even give a hell.

As it is, I vLitened the original disc without doing SP1 and installed it. It installed much quicker, spending a lot less time at "completing installation" (but still a good amount - much more than logical for "completing"...), sped through the desktop-wallpaper "in limbo" moments, and got me to my desktop in darn near "impressive for Vista" time. From there I found everything working about as nicely as Vista is capable of, but still not as good as XP. It only consumed 3.5gb of disk space and 360mb RAM, which kind-of brings me to my final point...

An operating system should not be the center of your computer's performance. Nobody should have to upgrade their hardware just to run a new version of a software application designed to facilitate running software applications. I can run Windows XP on every piece of hardware crossing my bedroom, from a 400MHz Celeron (sitting in the corner) to my main Core 2 Duo system. Vista is something that actually makes someone have to upgrade a computer just to get, well... to get an OS with improved back-end code to make the bloated front-end work almost as well as the last version. Superfetch and ReadyBoost just compensate for Vista's bloat... and try to make it work as well as XP does without all that garbage. Even more XP tweaks and you have a computer that makes Vista look like "wait, is this the old version or the new one?"...

And don't even get me started on Mac OS X vs Vista. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So did you go to vLite homepage?

It clearly states:

Important notes:

- slipstreaming x64 SP from x86 host is not supported, you need x64 host

- make sure that you have at least 4GB free at the partition where your temp folder is located (check in Options)

- be careful with removals after Slipstream. Some reported loop on first logon. Slipstream alone works, it is the removals that has to be checked. Use virtual machines for testing before real install. Checking this.

- SP1 supports only these 5 langauges for now: English (US), French, German, Japanese, or Spanish (Traditional).

- Control Panel - Features blank, fixing.

atlef.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for that particular one u can blame vlite ,but it comes with the WARNING

and to inform u that even m$ officially DONT support slipstreaming Vista SP1

so to those ENTHUSIATICS nuhi made the slipstream. it always comes with Warning.

if u want have fault free (as by m$) follows m$ set of rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tbh, what do you expect on such a poor spec

512mb, celeron, 10gb

recipe for disaster!

I expect it to work. Period.

That's why i'm going strong on TinyXP Platinum 2 on my main rig (C2D E6550 @ 3.73GHz, 2GB RAM, 8600GT, 320GB) and 98SE with all the blings and whistles of RP7 on my laptop (PIII @ 933, 512 RAM, 16MB video, 30GB), and 98SE + RP7 looks just like vista without aero, aero that vista turns off whenever it likes anyway.

Hell, and if you like transparency, WindowBlinds is better in getting bling on any version of windoze than aero will ever be on vista.

Vista = fail. That's why Vienna is just around the corner. If you really want to try vista, get TinyVista. Fits on a single CD with all the stuff you need, and also has stuff that M$ forgot to include. And forget about SP1. ;)

I have a dual-boot between TinyXP and TinyVista on my main rig, but it's set to boot in XP and it runs in XP 99% of the time. Even with all the tweaks that have been done in TinyVista to improve performance, i just couldn't get used to its smoothness - it's so smooth that it's laggy. I like my old "choppy" windows OS better.

Edited by Th3_uN1Qu3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...