Windows 7 Service Pack 1

redux

correction: actually I think it was 80073712 - as she removed my IE9 I've lost the History including the searches I did

one thing that annoyed me was being told Microsoft don't recommend third party products - of course this is absolutely fair neutrality if someone askes them for example which photo-editing suite to buy, but in the context at the time it had an unfortunate effect of sounding critical of something which might be [but wasn't] causing a problem

StumpyPumpy

redux wrote: »

correction: actually I think it was 80073712 - as she removed my IE9 I've lost the History including the searches I did

one thing that annoyed me was being told Microsoft don't recommend third party products - of course this is absolutely fair neutrality if someone askes them for example which photo-editing suite to buy, but in the context at the time it had an unfortunate effect of sounding critical of something which might be [but wasn't] causing a problem

80073701 The referenced assembly could not be found - means that in all likelihood the download failed/was incomplete/corrupted or in your specific case you ran out of disk space
80073712 The component store is in an inconsistent state - means your current installation is corrupt. The System Update Readiness Tool is the recommended way of trying to fix this error.

For what it is worth: The browser choice program is a EU mandated requirement, MS would be happy not to have to install it to, but they are forced to. Windows Genuine Advantage is the anti-piracy system, you've got it whether you want it or not, and you've always had it, it is core to Windows (Vista and 7). Disabling AV and beta software is always a good move when installing problematic updates.

I assume you mean you've lost the Google Search bar(?) that went with IE9 but I don't know why you lost your history as I believe it is common between IE8 & IE9, stored at %userprofile%\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\History
I don't seem to see a context to you being told "Microsoft don't recommend third party products" so it is hard to speculate, but it is a true statement, it does not mean they don't think you should use third party products, just that support will not endorse any.

Finally, when you install a Windows SP it uses a what is known as a scratch area, the install package is compressed and need to be expanded, this means that during the install Windows may require almost 3 times the amount of disk space that it ends up using (the compressed files, the expanded files and the original files it intends to replace), the extra space is recovered at the end of the installation. The Windows 7 SP1 (32-bit) installation notes estimates the required disk space as 4100mb if you download it and 750mb if you use Windows Update. (The difference is because Update patches files, download are full file replacements)

I have to say, that I think you are being grossly unfair on the support engineer who was trying to help you, and who, based on your description, seems to have done nothing wrong, followed the correct procedure and given legitimate advice. Keep in mind, too, that she was helping you even though MS's system could not validate your Product ID - which may have been a fault in the system but was not the engineer's fault - this meant for the purposes of this call you were unlicensed. Most companies would refuse point blank to deal with you until the validity of your product could be confirmed. Top that off with the fact that you were trying to install a SP on a partition with very limited disk space (never recommended) and, if you did as you say, and installed Windows 7 on top of the beta, rather than deleting the beta then installing the release version, you were running an unsupported configuration (your W7 beta agreement stated that you should uninstall the beta before installing the release and if you didn't, you did so at your own risk. Sure, I know everyone does it, but that doesn't change the facts) You were also running other beta software (IE9) which again means your configuration is unsupported (See the bit that says do not install on a production machine or words to that effect)

So perhaps you should should step into her shoes for a moment... She has a customer who doesn't have a confirmed legal copy of Windows, has an unsupported configuration, uses beta software (IE9), has very limited resources (disk space) and a corrupt current installation (0x80073712) Said customer challenges what she wants to install (Windows Genuine Advantage) hasn't bothered to create system recovery disks (Dell prompts you to do this, first thing with a new machine - it backs up all those Dell installed programs you want to keep) and - rightly or wrongly - she has been informed that the customer is abusive. Still, she spends 3+ hours trying to resolve your issue and will have missed her customer quota for the day in doing so.

For her trouble, you repay her by coming here and accusing her of wasting your time and messing up your computer. I wonder if I can guess how much you paid for this support call? Have you considered buying an iBook?

Richie-from-the-Boro

Bump - for those new poster who will benefit

birkee

Windows 7 64 bit: When I saw how it was downloading, I assumed that EVERYONE was on-line downloading at 9am in the morning, so I stopped it.
Tried again at 10pm, because all the day workers had got off-line, and freed up some capacity on the internet. 87Mb (in my case) downloaded much faster later on.
At a guess, a difference of something like, probably a couple of hours when busy, and 15 minutes when less busy.

DatabaseError

redux - if you're determined to keep whatever dell installed, and it isn't available to download from them. Why not back up all documents, remove excess partitions, factory restore (vista image) then run the 7 upgrade, which should keep everything in place?

redux

StumpyPumpy, you seem to have been rather selective in your reading of what I said

Just some examples: the reception person accused me of swearing when I hadn't, as a pretext to threaten to end the call, History isn't the same as Favorites, so while I still have the latter, the History goes back to only Thursday, I installed in the same partition as the release candidate, not over the beta as you said, and I now still have a PC with no anti-virus running, not just temporarily while the update was attempted and failed a couple of times.

And you helpfully have a definition of what the error code meant, whereas they didn't seem to have any more than a vague remark this error had also been seen with Vista, and the series of guesses about the potential cause including IE9 and third party software (including some that was inactive). But the bit about the System Update Readiness Tool didn't help here either, partly as it wasn't available to begin with, and didn't solve the problem by the time of the next 3 failures.

The support agent didn't make the same accusation that you vaguely imply, that my copy might be non-genuine, couldn't explain the reception persons remarks, and gained permission from a manager to open a case and deal with it. She installed WGA (which I didn't challenge at all because I didn't notice; kindly retract your accusation), and it's wasn't a cause of this issue and hasn't flagged anything since.

Thank you for your quoted remarks on size needed. The seem unduly pessimistic though, given that this has now worked and the overall size is almost the same, though I suppose it is also a question of the extra workspace needed during the process.
_

By the way, all the Windows Updates before Thursday are no longer listed. I assume or guess this is because the previous Software Distribution folder was renamed with a .old suffix. But I wish I could remember the detail of some of the other things she did, renaming another folder to .old and specifically like disabling those third party programs especially the anti-virus.

Another dilemma arises here: some would suggest completely replacing Vista with Windows 7 on here, while others seem to suspect something about the provenance of the W7. If the latter issue isn't put to bed, one course of action could leave me without an operating system when I currently have 2.

Anyway, I reiterate my comment to just ignore the error and try later, rather than spend half a day talking to Microsoft

Richie-from-the-Boro

Better still do what my illustrious friend DatabaseError says about

- backup
- then download Decrapifier to a USB stick

but

- then re-instate the O/S the factory default
- then run Decrapifier
- then connect to the net and get MSEssentials
- and only then get the SP1

spud17

No problems here so far.

I got in from work, turned on PC, decided to let it download/install. I let it run whilst I was doing other stuff, clicked as I passed, if required, asked to restart, did some configuring, restarted, more configuring.

A total of 15/20 mins, everything back to normal, no fuss, quite underwhelmed.

StumpyPumpy

redux wrote: »

StumpyPumpy, you seem to have been rather selective in your reading of what I said
Me selective? What did I omit? To make sure it doesn't happen again I'll go through exactly what you've just said

Just some examples: the reception person accused me of swearing when I hadn't, as a pretext to threaten to end the call,
Any call screener that attempted to do this would be out of a job very quickly. Even if they wanted to, the fact that they are recorded and monitored live means that disciplinary proceedings would follow. Maybe you didn't use profanities, maybe the terminology was wrong, but did you raise your voice? Get angry and irate? Converse in a way that would be regarded by decent society as unreasonable? Unless you have a copy of the recording you wish to post, no one will really know.
History isn't the same as Favorites,
No it isn't, and nor did I say it was

I don't know why you lost your history as I believe it is common between IE8 & IE9, stored at %userprofile%\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\History

Favorites are stored at %userprofile%\Favorites
so while I still have the latter, the History goes back to only Thursday, I installed in the same partition as the release candidate, not over the beta as you said,
So when you said

Then I installed w 7 Ultimate on top of that

Did you delete the beta first? - because that statement implies not. If you installed in the same partition and didn't first delete the beta it is an unsupported configuration. In any event, using beta software (IE9) makes it an unsupported configuration, as I said: read your beta agreements.
and I now still have a PC with no anti-virus running, not just temporarily while the update was attempted and failed a couple of times.
Why can't you re-enable/reinstall it? Which AV software is it? Maybe someone here can help you with that.
And you helpfully have a definition of what the error code meant, whereas they didn't seem to have any more than a vague remark this error had also been seen with Vista, and the series of guesses about the potential cause including IE9 and third party software (including some that was inactive).
Sorry, my fault, I should have made it clear - I know exactly what these errors mean: I looked at the source code.
But the bit about the System Update Readiness Tool didn't help here either, partly as it wasn't available to begin with, and didn't solve the problem by the time of the next 3 failures.
The SURT was made available on the 22/2/2011. The error message you got was because of corruption in your current installation. Seems like the corruption was too extreme for the SURT to fix it. But are you saying it wasn't worth a try?
The support agent didn't make the same accusation that you vaguely imply, that my copy might be non-genuine, couldn't explain the reception persons remarks, and gained permission from a manager to open a case and deal with it.
I didn't imply anything about your copy I simply stated what Microsoft's position would be. you said

My product ID wasn't shown as valid

So what are they supposed to think?
She installed WGA (which I didn't challenge at all because I didn't notice; kindly retract your accusation), and it's wasn't a cause of this issue and hasn't flagged anything since.
OK, I retract my comment that you challenged WGA, though you implied it and replace it with "Browser Choice". But I do not retract the statement that WGA is a core component to Windows Vista and Windows 7, you always had it, it wasn't new but a corrupt/broken/hacked version can cause installations to fail. So she was right to re-install it.

Thank you for your quoted remarks on size needed. The seem unduly pessimistic though, given that this has now worked and the overall size is almost the same, though I suppose it is also a question of the extra workspace needed during the process.
As I explained - it needs space to install it doesn't keep it.
_

By the way, all the Windows Updates before Thursday are no longer listed. I assume or guess this is because the previous Software Distribution folder was renamed with a .old suffix. But I wish I could remember the detail of some of the other things she did, renaming another folder to .old and specifically like disabling those third party programs especially the anti-virus.

Another dilemma arises here: some would suggest completely replacing Vista with Windows 7 on here, while others seem to suspect something about the provenance of the W7. If the latter issue isn't put to bed, one course of action could leave me without an operating system when I currently have 2.
This is easy to resolve. Microsoft products come with a Certificate of Authenticity follow the advice on http://www.microsoft.com/uk/licensing/homeuser/is-your-software-legit.mspx and http://www.microsoft.com/howtotell/default.aspx?displaylang=en

Anyway, I reiterate my comment to just ignore the error and try later, rather than spend half a day talking to Microsoft
And I will reiterate mine...

You had an unsupported, unvalidated Windows 7 installation which had corruption. This caused a major SP to fail. It wasn't the time of day that caused it to fail it was your corrupt installation. Your "ignore the error and try later" solution is specious.
By your own admission, despite the fact that you were unable to prove your eligibility for support, an engineer gave you 3+ hours of her, and Microsoft's time, without charge (or were you accidentally selective with that, and in fact you did buy a support contract?) She did this even though she had nowhere to cross-charge your call to (MS cross-charges CSS to responsible product groups, but grace calls are not cross-charged) So that was costing her department money (CSS is already a loss making unit for Microsoft, by the way), She spent all this time despite the fact that she is assessed on both Minutes per Incident (MpI) and Time to Closure (TtC) which your call would put over target, adversely affecting her weekly review.

Not once have you shown the slightest inclination toward acknowledging the efforts she made or the number of ways that she and others at Microsoft bent over backwards to try and get you up and running. Instead you snipe at them and imply incompetence on their part, yet everything you have listed would suggest the problem lies elsewhere.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Now that's a different / unusually articulate input from a 23 year old.