• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How much time does your PC take to install Vista?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
RC1 took little less than Beta2 but still 45+ minutes on a old Athlon XP.

BTW - RC1 (5600) has already blue screened for me once. "Release Candidate" it is definitely not but that won't stop MS from shipping it. I will wait for SP1 at least.

 
You should only be getting OS images from the source, getting them from a 3rd party is a very bad idea. RC1 is currently only available to a small(er) set of testers but will be publicy available very shortly.
BTW - RC1 (5600) has already blue screened for me once. "Release Candidate" it is definitely not but that won't stop MS from shipping it. I will wait for SP1 at least.
Click to expand...
So rather than complaining find out why it bluescreened and bug it, complaining alone accomplishes nothing.
 
Originally posted by: sharad
RC1 took little less than Beta2 but still 45+ minutes on a old Athlon XP.

BTW - RC1 (5600) has already blue screened for me once. "Release Candidate" it is definitely not but that won't stop MS from shipping it. I will wait for SP1 at least.
Click to expand...


Release Candidates are still in the testing phases. I'm no MS supporter, but you can't legitmately complain about a few bugs here and there in a RC. Your job (assuming you're a legit tester) is to find such bugs and then report them so that when the real version meant for general comsumption comes out it will actually work right.
 
Originally posted by: spyordie007
You should only be getting OS images from the source, getting them from a 3rd party is a very bad idea. RC1 is currently only available to a small(er) set of testers but will be publicy available very shortly.
BTW - RC1 (5600) has already blue screened for me once. "Release Candidate" it is definitely not but that won't stop MS from shipping it. I will wait for SP1 at least.
Click to expand...
So rather than complaining find out why it bluescreened and bug it, complaining alone accomplishes nothing.
Click to expand...

Originally posted by: MGMorden
Originally posted by: sharad
RC1 took little less than Beta2 but still 45+ minutes on a old Athlon XP.

BTW - RC1 (5600) has already blue screened for me once. "Release Candidate" it is definitely not but that won't stop MS from shipping it. I will wait for SP1 at least.
Click to expand...


Release Candidates are still in the testing phases. I'm no MS supporter, but you can't legitmately complain about a few bugs here and there in a RC. Your job (assuming you're a legit tester) is to find such bugs and then report them so that when the real version meant for general comsumption comes out it will actually work right.
Click to expand...

I am a legit MSDN subscriber. We are actually working on a product based on .netfx 3. We test things a little more thoroughly than average joes who just download builds off the net. Upon restart the OS automatically prompted me to submit a carsh report, which I did.

 
5600 took 1h 10m to upgrade 5536 on my workstation rig (to one of the 250 EIDE drives). That does not include the extra hour trying to get clean install to not still work.

WT, CTP folks have had RC1 since Saturday.
 
There was a core 2 duo which did a vista install in 10min, another A64 2800 with 1gig in 23minutes, how come such a difference
Anybody tried to load Vista directly from the HDD by copying files into the HDD first
 
Originally posted by: akshayt
There was a core 2 duo which did a vista install in 10min, another A64 2800 with 1gig in 23minutes, how come such a difference
Anybody tried to load Vista directly from the HDD by copying files into the HDD first
Click to expand...
Were you loading Home? I was loading Ultimate, so maybe that is the difference?

 
Installing RC-1 (5600) on my T-42 as a VMWare virtual machine now. Will report back on the time it took.

Enter the product key to loaded desktop = 40 minutes

One odd thing... When it loaded the desktop it said the system had restarted as a result of a critical error. Now, I wasn't at my desk watching the entire install but I never saw a reboot.

EDIT: I installed VMWare Tools and was prompted for a reboot. I clicked 'Yes'. After about 5 minutes of the shutdown screen I got a BSOD & crashdump followed by an automatic reboot. I'm back on the desktop now and things seem okay so far. NOTE: This did not happen with 5536.
 
RC1 took about 20 minutes to install for me, Beta 2 took about 45 minutes ..... big improvement!
 
As a long time MS hater, who hasn't wanted to run one of their OS's since Dos 6.22 (XP is, okay...) I tried the RC1.

very impressed at how fast it installed on my 64 3700+ on my Raptor. Well, it took awhile, but I didn't have to do anything! XP makes you click on sh!t a few times durring the install so you gotta stick around the PC (or set up some install script) I do believe all I did was start the Vista install, and come back about 25 minutes later to find it was asking for my name and was done.
 
Will Vista install faster if I use Daemon tools to mount the ISO rather than using the DVD drive. That would be like creating a virutal drive and actually installing from the HDD?

Also, why does vista install fast on some computers and slow on others?
 
Originally posted by: akshayt
Will Vista install faster if I use Daemon tools to mount the ISO rather than using the DVD drive. That would be like creating a virutal drive and actually installing from the HDD?

Also, why does vista install fast on some computers and slow on others?
Click to expand...

You cannot install Vista from the mounted image because of all the reboots that take place during the installation process (because Daemon tools must be running for the ISO to be mounted, and that can only happen after you boot back to XP), unless you installed from a virtual machine of course.

Here's what I did, since I don't have a DVD burner: mounted the ISO, copied all the files into one of my HDDs, and then ran the installer from XP. The installer 'remembers' the path you ran setup from and takes it from there. I think that's why it installed so fast in my rig, in spite of its being barely middle-end.
 
Despite repeated attempts, I cannot get Vista to install. I've experienced the same issues with both Beta 2 and RC1. It hangs after the initial booting from CD message. I'll be pretty irrate if I were to buy Vista on its release and have it do this.
 
Vista RC1 64-bit took about 25-30 minutes to install on my machine from start to finish. Since I didn't have any blank DVD's 😛, I mounted the ISO in Daemon Tools (in XP64) and started a clean install from there; it copied all the necessary files to the hard drive so it wasn't an issue rebooting without the actual DVD...
 
took about 25 minutes on my brand new nforce 550/A64 3200 box i just built. Installed the 64bit version. I'm using the SATA WD drive that was on sale at CompUSA this week.

nice thing is that there is no need to install nforce5 drivers under RC1. they are built in to the OS except for RAID.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top