Need Vista Home OEM image
-
@Dashrender said:
Alright, the ISO from gjacobse worked.
Currently downloading and installing SP1 and SP2 - this is a RTM disk. many hours of waiting ahead of me.
Glad it worked. It's been a while since I installed Vista,.. could you not skip SP1 and go to SP2?
-
In theory you are supposed to be able to go directly to SP2.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
In theory you are supposed to be able to go directly to SP2.
I always have. I have not restored one in a couple years, but I did it that way last time.
-
@gjacobse said:
@Dashrender said:
Alright, the ISO from gjacobse worked.
Currently downloading and installing SP1 and SP2 - this is a RTM disk. many hours of waiting ahead of me.
Glad it worked. It's been a while since I installed Vista,.. could you not skip SP1 and go to SP2?
Yes, you can. No need to install a previous service pack. The most recent is sufficient. You could do that on NT4.
-
@PSX_Defector said:
@gjacobse said:
@Dashrender said:
Alright, the ISO from gjacobse worked.
Currently downloading and installing SP1 and SP2 - this is a RTM disk. many hours of waiting ahead of me.
Glad it worked. It's been a while since I installed Vista,.. could you not skip SP1 and go to SP2?
Yes, you can. No need to install a previous service pack. The most recent is sufficient. You could do that on NT4.
Not quite. You could do it to a point but to get to the final release of SP6a you had to install SP4, then the Release Pack, then SP6a. Took three updates to get to the last one. But you did not need SP1, 2 or 3 to do it. And SP5 was not needed.
-
With Vista I thought you Had to install SP1 first because of the major changes from RTM to SP1?
I'll have to confirm that tomorrow.
-
I was pretty sure.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/948465
Windows Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) is a prerequisite for installing SP2 in Windows Vista. If you use Windows Update or the Automatic Update feature in Windows Vista, you will not be offered the option to install SP2 until you first install SP1.
-
Okay, that's weird and goes explicitly against MS' stated naming convention. They stated that the term SP used meant that it included the early SPs.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Okay, that's weird and goes explicitly against MS' stated naming convention. They stated that the term SP used meant that it included the early SPs.
Is it any weirder than the NT 4.0 setup you wrote about above?
The changes were so drastic in SP1 that it barely resembled the RTM.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Okay, that's weird and goes explicitly against MS' stated naming convention. They stated that the term SP used meant that it included the early SPs.
Is it any weirder than the NT 4.0 setup you wrote about above?
The changes were so drastic in SP1 that it barely resembled the RTM.
Yes, because the terms were not explicitly to mean that until after NT.
