Future updates when SP2 not installed

Like many other people I'm getting the message E_FAIL(0x80004005) when
attempting to install Vista SP2.

I've concluded that this is due to the custom boot manager I have
installed. I've decided it would be too much trouble to un-install this
boot manager, install SP2 and then re-install my boot manager.

My question is, will future Vista updates be picked up correctly without
SP2 being installed?

TIA.

--
Exiddor.

 

They should be fine yes, most people wait a few months before updating to a SP just to check all the 'creases' are ironed out

 

"Exiddor" <exiddor@noemail.invalid> wrote in message
news:LC3Vl.180886$uD.106551@en-nntp-09.am2.easynews.com...
> Like many other people I'm getting the message E_FAIL(0x80004005) when
> attempting to install Vista SP2.
>
> I've concluded that this is due to the custom boot manager I have
> installed. I've decided it would be too much trouble to un-install this
> boot manager, install SP2 and then re-install my boot manager.
>
> My question is, will future Vista updates be picked up correctly without
> SP2 being installed?
>
> TIA.
>
> --
> Exiddor.

You are not guaranteed to receive all future updates without potential
prerequisites such as SP2.
For example SP2 requires that you have SP1, so in the event of SP3 arriving
you may well be required to have SP2.
There are a number of hotfixes etc that required SP1 as a prerequisite, it
is therefore a reasonable assumption that SP2 may be a future prerequisite
for other fixes etc.
You should replace your none-standard/third party boot manager and update
your system.
--
Mike Brannigan

 

"Mike Brannigan" <Mike.Brannigan@localhost> wrote in message
news:9781428A-7253-4926-A194-2B540F10D3CD@microsoft.com...
> "Exiddor" <exiddor@noemail.invalid> wrote in message
> news:LC3Vl.180886$uD.106551@en-nntp-09.am2.easynews.com...
>> Like many other people I'm getting the message E_FAIL(0x80004005) when
>> attempting to install Vista SP2.
>>
>> I've concluded that this is due to the custom boot manager I have
>> installed. I've decided it would be too much trouble to un-install this
>> boot manager, install SP2 and then re-install my boot manager.
>>
>> My question is, will future Vista updates be picked up correctly without
>> SP2 being installed?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>> --
>> Exiddor.
>
> You are not guaranteed to receive all future updates without potential
> prerequisites such as SP2.
> For example SP2 requires that you have SP1, so in the event of SP3
> arriving you may well be required to have SP2.
> There are a number of hotfixes etc that required SP1 as a prerequisite, it
> is therefore a reasonable assumption that SP2 may be a future prerequisite
> for other fixes etc.
> You should replace your none-standard/third party boot manager and update
> your system.

What if the non-standard boot manager is an OEM setup to facilitate a hot
key on boot up to the system restore feature and the OEM (HP) says they
won't support changing this?

--
Kerry Brown
MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/

 

This is a serious issue.
Like all things Vista the SP2 package is not what it is promised to be. On
most desktops in my experience SP2 has not caused major problems although I
suspect overall performance is even slower, mostly what I have seen on Intel
based laptops is clearly worse (even longer spinning circles before any
disc access and more frequent Explorer/desktop freezes).
Microsoft has to support security upgrades for the future because around the
world thousands of machines are never going to be upgraded from XP and users
are right to be wary of Vista service packs. If all these machines are not
updated the potential for global Internet disaster is overwhelming and it
will be entirely the fault of Microsoft.
If Microsoft wanted to score a global marketing coup they would let Vista
users upgrade to Win7 for a nominal fee during a launch period and charge
whatever they like later for upgrades and for new installs. Alas, Microsoft
would rather fight lawsuits and pay government imposed penalties than act
responsibly.

 

"Kerry Brown" <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote in message
news:%23n6ADq44JHA.3476@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> "Mike Brannigan" <Mike.Brannigan@localhost> wrote in message
> news:9781428A-7253-4926-A194-2B540F10D3CD@microsoft.com...
>> "Exiddor" <exiddor@noemail.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:LC3Vl.180886$uD.106551@en-nntp-09.am2.easynews.com...
>>> Like many other people I'm getting the message E_FAIL(0x80004005) when
>>> attempting to install Vista SP2.
>>>
>>> I've concluded that this is due to the custom boot manager I have
>>> installed. I've decided it would be too much trouble to un-install this
>>> boot manager, install SP2 and then re-install my boot manager.
>>>
>>> My question is, will future Vista updates be picked up correctly without
>>> SP2 being installed?
>>>
>>> TIA.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Exiddor.
>>
>> You are not guaranteed to receive all future updates without potential
>> prerequisites such as SP2.
>> For example SP2 requires that you have SP1, so in the event of SP3
>> arriving you may well be required to have SP2.
>> There are a number of hotfixes etc that required SP1 as a prerequisite,
>> it is therefore a reasonable assumption that SP2 may be a future
>> prerequisite for other fixes etc.
>> You should replace your none-standard/third party boot manager and update
>> your system.
>
> What if the non-standard boot manager is an OEM setup to facilitate a hot
> key on boot up to the system restore feature and the OEM (HP) says they
> won't support changing this?
>
> --
> Kerry Brown
> MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
> http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/

Then the OEM will have to work with Microsoft to produce an OEM distributed
variant of SP2 or appropriate patch etc for SP2 for their OEM built systems.
Such is the "interesting" world of OEM products, in some cases it is
actually reasonable for the OEM to deny you support if you deploy OS service
packs that they have not yet approved, tested or they produced any relevant
patches for.
User of OEM machines should be very careful of just accepting all patches
and updates from Windows Update (or doing it themselves) - but most never
do.
--

Mike Brannigan

 

"botox" <fac_187@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4EFC6046-75E7-427E-A1C1-0376FF9D582F@microsoft.com...
> This is a serious issue.
> Like all things Vista the SP2 package is not what it is promised to be. On
> most desktops in my experience SP2 has not caused major problems although
> I suspect overall performance is even slower, mostly what I have seen on
> Intel based laptops is clearly worse (even longer spinning circles before
> any disc access and more frequent Explorer/desktop freezes).
> Microsoft has to support security upgrades for the future because around
> the world thousands of machines are never going to be upgraded from XP and
> users are right to be wary of Vista service packs. If all these machines
> are not updated the potential for global Internet disaster is
> overwhelming and it will be entirely the fault of Microsoft.
> If Microsoft wanted to score a global marketing coup they would let Vista
> users upgrade to Win7 for a nominal fee during a launch period and charge
> whatever they like later for upgrades and for new installs. Alas,
> Microsoft would rather fight lawsuits and pay government imposed penalties
> than act responsibly.

I am afraid that your expectations area tad too high. Of course Microsoft
do not have to keep supporting old product versions, if they had to they
would!

I fail to see how Microsoft could get a global marketing coup about
anything. Before that could happen, that would need some serious
competition.