Discussion in 'Windows 7' started by pilot76103, Aug 4, 2009.
You need to login to view this posts content.
Or - they will release a hotfix for this as usual.
Easier for the big OEMs to integrate an hotfix than to re-load and re-create all the images.
I just ran it successfully. I see it did take about 2 GB's of ram though. Luckily, I have 4.
You need to login to view this posts content.
I have also just noted that the memory usage I experienced was roughly the same amount of data that was on the drive I chkdsk'ed.
This is old, the chkdsk bug was known for some time already. MS will just patch it, why redo the whole RTM process just for a bug in a program?
WOW, talk about un-necessary theatrics!
I don't know what 'make believe' world you are living in but RTM sign-off has already happened. MS has dealt with bugs like this for years with all of its software. This isn't even close to a 'show stopper' and won't change anything, especially since GA is still almost 3 months away & until then the OS is not officially on consumer's PCs.
It will be classified as a 'Critical' bug if they anticipate it will impact a significant install base, or 'Important' otherwise. There will be a hotfix initially and then after some regression testing, a patch will appear on WU, well before GA when the public will be running W7.
There will NOT be a re-release of the RTM or any other such BS. Remember that RTM sign-off is a process, not just a version of software on a CD/DVD. The end result is a piece of software, but there is much more that goes on behind the scenes that comprises the process. One bug will not change that.
Glad I have 8 gigs of RAM!!
Yes definetley not a show stopper or that big a deal at all, and saying that they will have to re release an rtm???? ***? Alot of People do now know what Gold code means, and i think Admins should jump on this **** straight away and shut down threads, Also stating something with no evidence form on official source is just plain stupid.
If download the update pack that is on the site it will fix it the oem's have the hotfix already this old news that how the hotfixes leak time to get under a rock!!!!
I didn't get any problems running the checkdisk. No BSOD.
I have 2GB max memory and it maxes out at about 1.89 and doesn't cause any crash...
I'm not doing any un-necessary theatrics! I'm personally stating my opinion that this should have not been even released to RTM with such a critical bug. They need to rebuild the TechNet/MSDN copies with a pre-patched copy for those who might install Windows 7 on a computer without internet. Yes it is rare that someone would use Windows 7 without internet but some consumers might still be in that predicament, especially in 3rd world countries where they might be using Windows 7 Starter edition on a cheap netbook that doesn't have internet. It is in my personal opinion that build 7600.16385 not be released to TechNet/MSDN or to GA without being patched for this critical bug!
IMHO not a critical bug at all - not a showstopper.
Remember that this OS didn't matured yet.
Do you remember just how BAD XP pre-SP2 was ?
Sasser ? Blaster ?
Now that's what I call CRITICAL security holes.
Well sadly PrEzi we aren't talking security holes at this point. We are talking major issue in every day use. While you might not use "chkdsk" every day, think of those who are in the PC Repair business like me who may need to use "chkdsk" on a customers Hard Drive or even enterprises who would use this. If you ask me, I know Intel has plans to use Windows 7 right away, they may recieve word of this critical bug and choose to wait for them to patch it. I stand by what I said and will not change that opiniond since I do know of a few things that make this a Critical Show Stopper Bug.
From Neowin.net Forums.
I definantly 2nd that Chris123NT. Also, if "chkdsk" can crash a computer by BSODing it during a fix that "chkdsk" might be performing it can perminantly delete or render data unusable on the drive it is running on. This is 100% a Critical Show Stopper bug that IMO needs to have the RTM recalled and recompiled before the TechNet/MSDN copies go live and at least a Hotfix for the OEMs to impliment in System Recovery.
Once again, let me point out that customers (yours or anybody's) will not have this OS legally until GA. Your response supports exactly what I was saying as far as real customer impact. By that time MS will have a fix. In fact for all you know they already have a hotfix, just because you do not happen to have it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Based on replies to this post it doesn't seem to be a much of a problem at all.
Also, you are quite entitled to your opinion but you did not post this as opinion, you posted it as a factual news item specifically with the intent to create FUD, so stop with the opinion BS.
Finally, what are these "few things" that you know? If you have real facts to share, then do so....once you get your foot out of your mouth!
Sorry to drag you down FuzzyMaster but technically people like myself in the computer industry will have legal copies of Windows 7 starting Thursday August 6th throught TechNet MSDN. Don't tell me that the only legal time of having the OS is GA because it is not. Starting Thursday businesses and anyone with TechNet/MSDN will be able to legally use this. I was not refering to just fixing customer units, sometimes you have to remove a hard drive from a customer unit and use your own therefore the issue is still relevant enough to initiate a recall/redistribution of RTM at least in the TechNet, MSDN, and GA categories. OEMs can impliment the Hotfix into system recovery where as the average consumer can't impliment it directly to their Retail disc. This is a issue that needs to be solved in regards to the possibility that not all Buyers of Windows 7 will have internet and the capabilities to run Windows Update!
These are my few things by the way...
Pilot, I agree with your statement. Yet MS will offer a fix for this.... It isn't a big deal?
and where in the hell do you get this "16399" subversion build from?
mods please, these posts and posters need SERIOUS consideration for possible boot/bans..
"patched 16399 builds"
heh? do you guys who spread this false garbage get off doing it?
free speech is one thing, looking to start panicks based on blantant lies, such as " build 16399" stating a build THAT DOES NOT EXIST, in my opinion DESERVES a ban for at least 7 days..
again, where is your " proof" of a build 16399? is there another RTM SIGN OFF?
since when has ms ever used a subversion from 384, 385, THEN 399?
THEN ANSWER? NEVER!! YOU SIR ARE FULL OF BALONEY!!