Microsoft → Re: [WIN7] No Service Pack 2

If anything, having SP2 released would allow less monthly updates to be installed when you first install Windows 7 onto a system. As an example, I rebuilt my system back on Oct 17th with SP1 built-in to the install media. Still, I had over 100 updates to install from Windows update, that took about an hour to do.

Not to mention the size of these updates was around 400 or 500 MB. While that is not that bad, if you happen to have an ISP with a low monthly data cap, and build 4-5 systems a month, it could put you over the limit. So, maybe the ISP's are behind this? Why release a SP that you can download once and save, when you can install over a 100 updates on a rebuilt, using up 500 MB of your download cap each time you reinstall the OS? Sure, many people don't rebuild their systems every day, but I hope everyone gets the idea that I'm going for here.

--Brian

^ This. It also ties into the notion that it's is an attempt to push people to Win8, by making dealing with Win7 more painful as time goes on.

Maybe that's the problem. There's very rarely a valid reason to reinstall the OS.

In my case, I re-install my OS every few months. I do it because I don't like to do a lot of updates over updates over updates for different software. Take Firefox or Thunderbird for example. There has been a new version of both of those about once a month.

Adobe Flash and Reader is another example.

I'm also someone who will install things to test something out, fix an issue, or try out a new piece of software. Along the way, I may "hose" my system. I don't like a lot of "extra" applications installed. However, I may have to install "extra" things depending on what I'm working on.

I'm also don't believe that an uninstall fully removes everything that it installed. There is always some registry key, or file/folder left behind.

So, to clean things up, I re-install the OS from scratch.

Sure, I could use something like Ghost or other image program, but I just choose not to. Maybe I'm a bit OCD when it comes to my computer. I like to know what is installed, in the right order, and that everything is as it should be.

That is why I re-install my OS as much as I do.

On a side note, look at it from the corporate world. The last company I worked for, it was actually faster for them to re-image a system rather then track down and remove a virus or malware infection. So, the image that was being used always had to be up to date with all of the security patches. With each month, more updates from Microsoft would come out, and need to be installed at the time of the OS deployment. Sure for those already up and running, adding 6 or 7 more updates is not that big of a deal. But, if you look at the time it took for the image to be installed when SP1 first came out, and compare it to now, it will be a lot longer as you have to install all those updates before giving the system to the end user.

Actually, total virus or malware removal is best done, IMHO, as a full format and re-install of the OS, and all applications. It just helps to guarantee that the infection is really gone. If you have a good backup of your data, and the ability to install all your applications, why take the time to try to "fix" it, when a re-install will fix the problem just the same? Sure it may be more work, but in the end, you will end up with a nice clean system!

--Brian

Looks like you need a lesson in virtualization. There is no need to "reinstall" your main system if something get's hosed up.

VMware workstation is what I use. I have XP, Win7 and Win8 desktops which I use for testing. Something buggers up a simple rollback is all that's required to take the system back to the fresh install state.