126849
story
Comments: 175 +- Hardware: Does the Windows Logo Mean Anything? on Saturday April 07 2007, @01:41PM
Posted
by
kdawson
on Saturday April 07 2007, @01:41PM
from the certify-this dept.
from the certify-this dept.
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicms.gif); width:75px; height:55px;
microsoft
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicos.gif); width:66px; height:49px;
os
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicsoftware.gif); width:65px; height:65px;
software
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicwindows.gif); width:49px; height:65px;
windows
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topichardware.gif); width:64px; height:55px;
hardware
Dan writes "The Windows Logo Program was supposed to be Microsoft's key to ensuring that all hardware devices work well with the Windows operating system. It worked in Windows XP, it would be expected to work just as well in Windows Vista. Unfortunately, there are obvious signs that the Windows Logo Program is no longer a trustworthy standard. Recently, even graphics cards are getting certified without working drivers. The article digs into the 321-page Microsoft Windows Logo Program 3.0 document to find out what the Windows logo is supposed to mean in Vista."
Related Stories
Your Rights Online: Vista Branding Confusing Even To Microsoft 236 comments
It is more rational to sacrifice one life than six.
-- Spock, "The Galileo Seven", stardate 2822.3
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Insightful)
> out what the Windows logo is supposed to mean in Vista.
I thought it meant that the manufacturer had paid a fee to Microsoft.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Who really paid attention to the window logo program anyway?
Re:Isn't it obvious? (Score:4, Insightful)
Charles Simonyi would be rolling over in his grave if he saw what Microsoft was doing with the logo program. Just kidding, of course. He's not dead. He's not riding the Shuttle today.
Parent
Re:Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Funny)
1.)Pay Microsoft Fee.
2.)Driver gets made.
3.)Profit!
However, it appears somebody removed step 2.
Parent
Re:Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Funny)
1- Pay Microsoft fee
2- ???
3- Profit!
looks like an improvement to me. Maybe I have steps 2 and 3 swapped.
Parent
Re:Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Funny)
"Poison" - Do not eat or drink
"Flammable" - Keep away from flames and hot surfaces
"Windows" - Do not waste your money on this item
=Smidge=
Parent
Re:Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Isn't it obvious? (Score:4, Interesting)
I wish I could find the article I read at the time. Probably its in waybackmachine somewhere, I can't be the only one who saw this.
That's why so many things installed into windows xp by users produce the 'this driver has not been signed by Microsoft/may harm your system' stuff. That's a hangover from the expectation that manufacturers would allow Microsoft to manage their drivers for them and verify their correctness. I suspect this was an attempt, at least at first, to ensure that people didn't produce drivers that might break windows itself.
It was rejected on the very sound grounds that this would give Microsoft far too much control over the software of these other companies. After all, if Microsoft controlled the only place to get verified drivers, then that meant they could just as easily decide to halt supply of a driver if a company failed to play ball. I don't think it was meant to involve a fee.
They're trying it again in Vista, albeit in slightly different form.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Or like the centralized repository method that distros use?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Isn't it obvious? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
WHQL.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Once upon a time, we had a very very obscure problem that they shipped that prevented WHQL certification. Until that was going to be fixed, they shipped it as a linux-only offering. Many many expensive weeks of trying to support thousands of these things that were dying left and right finally nailed down what caused the strange sudden deaths of the product, the WHQL-blocking flaw they neglected in the name of getting it out the door for linux...
In summary, WHQL isn't the whole picture, but no company producing hardware regardless of the Windows market should ignore it, unless they have an impeccable testing track record without ever looking at WHQL.
Parent
Who cares? (Score:5, Funny)
I want to know if it is Linux compatible..
Ducks
10 years ago, that would have been true (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:10 years ago, that would have been true (Score:5, Interesting)
Please read the comment again. I didn't say anything bad about Microsoft or Windows. I did say, that I was interested if the hardware does support Linux. I am very happy to report that the number of products reporting Linux compatibility is growing very quickly.
I needed a presentation pointer (Power Point remote) 2 weeks ago. Visiting Office Depot, I found a set of remotes. Many listed software requirements and Windows versions it was compatible with. The one I picked up is the one simply listed as "No Drivers Required" Plug and play compatible with Windows, Macintosh, and Linux. The package was right. The remote simply was a remote page up page down and enter USB keyboard.
Many items which list Windows compatiblility have the listing only for the included software. I picked up a Logitech wireless keyboard and mouse and assumed that I would only get basic 102 key functionality without installing the Windows software.
Woo! Hoo!.. All the buttons I tested worked. The volume, mute, play, internet, email... all worked on Dapper Drake. I wish they had noted that on the outside of the box.
Most hardware comes with the assumption of Windows or Macintosh compatibility.
Now not bashing Windows... What I want to know is Is it Linux compatible? Lots of stuff is, but they don't mention it on the box.
Since I am transitioning away from Windows.. I don't care much if it is Windows compatible.
Parent
Re:Linux compatibility (Score:3, Interesting)
So the companies would not be able to guarantee Linux compatibility.
And when it is known that some distro's include the keymaps, it could easly be printed on the box;
Tested on Red Hat ver x.xx, Suse ver x.xx, Ubuntu, Breezy/Dapper/Edgy/Fiesty etc.
For other versions, the keymap can be installed from www.sourceforge.org/logitechM610.html
I expect to see more of this on the box in the future.
Companies which provide t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I seriously doubt that. The Slashdot Community was over-zealous in attacking Microsoft. Eventually it spouted enough bullshit to recieve a backlash. (Watch, same thing will happen to Sony within the next year.) No need to pay people to take sides on the internet, it's natural. If this really bothers you, the first thing you can do is lead by example. Don't go overboard wi
Re: (Score:2)
It's a relative thing (Score:3, Insightful)
The hardware manufacturers look at all the other things that run in a broken, half-assed way on Windows and think "Hell, our stuff works at least as well as all that junk; there's no reason we shouldn't be able to put the Windows logo on it as well."
You mean the SATAN LOGO PROGRAM! (Score:5, Funny)
3.0 times = 6 6 6
SATAN LOGO PROGRAM!
Isn't it a warning sign (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
VISTA READY! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:VISTA READY! (Score:5, Funny)
When you buy an HDTV-READY television, that doesn't mean it will handle HDTV. You still have to buy more hardware to convert the signal. So by VISTA READY, I think one can construe that you still need to buy additional RAM, among other things.
Parent
I thought it meant, stay away, this a winX product (Score:5, Insightful)
You know as in winmodem or winprinter, a device that has taken much of the logic from the device were it belongs and onto the cpu were it will cause slowdown and despite the fact that software should be easier to update this only means the device will ship with buggy logic wich will never actually get updated.
Windows "ready" meant stay the fuck away. This is crap only a windows user would fall for.
After all, what device does NOT work with windows? For all its craptastic nature the windows OS widely supported and you would be very hard pressed to go into an average store (look, the apple store does not count alright) selling computer components and come out with a device that does not have windows drivers.
The windows logo therefore means absolutely nothing. Never has, never will. It can't, ms can't even certify its own stuff. Let alone others. When MS stuff works with MS stuff, then and only then can they start commenting on others people hardware.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
My experience (Score:5, Funny)
It means buy Vista you dumb slug. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:It means buy Vista you dumb slug. (Score:4, Interesting)
I dual boot WinXP and Ubuntu. When people are wondering whether or not to switch, I always ask them what they use their computer for. Hardware is always a second consideration. The whole operating systems wars isn't as black and white as you think. For some, FOSS suits their needs best. For others, windows does. There is a lot more too it than that, but as soon as you dogmatically say that Windows is better that Linux, or indeed vice-versa, you're trying to make both operating systems into some sort of solve-all-your-problems
My second argument is supply and demand. If people didn't actively want an alternative to their old operating system, why would there be one available? You can't develop something with the expectation that no people will use it.
Parent
Speaking of logos... (Score:2, Funny)
My Dad's boss thought that the old keyboards with the pre-xp logo they had wouldn't work with the new XP computers they had just received,so instead of arguing with him, They ended up ordering 200+ new "XP" Keyboards.
The funny thing is, even those had the old windows logos on the keys.
Link is to a rather hostile page (Score:5, Insightful)
The page being linked to has so much advertising-related dreck that it uses 8-12% of the CPU just sitting there. Much more if you move the mouse over it. And that's with popup blocking. There's ad-related Javascript on that page for at least five different ad systems: "Rojackpot", "Google Syndication", "PriceGrabber", "Extreme-DM.com", and "AdSolution". Plus attempts to get the article onto Digg and Reddit.
The article content sucks, too. They don't understand the WHQL process, and don't give any real insight into whether it is broken. It's just a page of junk content intended to fool blogs like Slashdot into feeding them traffic. And Slashdot's "editors" fell for it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"Rojakpot" (no c) is the old name of the site, not an ad system. Adrian's Rojakpot is a tech blog that has been around for ages, and only recently changed its name to Tech ARP (guess what ARP stands for).
Yeah, the site is quite heavy on the ads, much like Sharky Extreme and other tech blogs run by individuals. I recommend Ad
What it means to me. (Score:4, Insightful)
That is, when I see the logo I get reminded of the Windows tax that I'm about to pay, and get more annoyed with both M$ and the manufacturer.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows Tax? (Score:3, Interesting)
If you buy from a reputable manufacturer such as Dell, it is easy to get your money back. Just make sure that the disc is still in its packaging and send it back, and you should have your refund within a few days. There are also many manufacturers that sell laptops with an alternative OS installed (or completely blank if you would rather install an OS yourself).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Means I Have to Debug Friends Problems (Score:3, Interesting)
I've just told friends to stop the B.S. & buy a MacMini. $599 and you don't have to worry about BSOD, missing DLLs, hardware that doesn't mount/recognize, etc. They have the screen & mouse and at most need a Mac keyboard. Enough older smaller LCDs are around that you can get them for next to nothing. Plus, if they actually do need to run Win XP, they can do it in Parallels and EASILY BACK IT UP AND RESTORE IT ANY TIME IT IS REQUIRED.
Geesh.
Re:Means I Have to Debug Friends Problems (Score:4, Interesting)
When the computer gets scrambled up, then the time spent extracting various data files before wiping the HD comes in as another time waster.
I am into "Use What Works Easiest".
At least if Win XP Pro on Parallels in a MacMini goes wonko, replacement of the virtual HD file is as simple as can be. Plus, if you want to extract files from a corrupted PC file, you can just save the file somewhere else to work on it.
Parent
Works for Me (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Works for Me (Score:5, Funny)
A few days later, the lid came crashing off the garbage can when I stepped on the foot switch.
Probably just a strange coincidence
Parent
It is and has always been a marketing gimmick (Score:5, Insightful)
The Windows logo program worked for XP because MS management seems to have been more competent with XP than they have been with Vista. Is this because of top level personnel changes, MS being spooked by increasingly visible competition (regardless of actual threat level to MS) since 2001, or both?
It was never meant to actually certify anything, only give the appearance of such. The fact that it worked for XP is icing on the cake, but the slapdash hardware situation (insane system requirements, spotty device support) in Vista exposes the program for what it is: a way for hardware OEM's to ride MS's monopoly coattails.
Means MS got their cut (Score:2)
I thought it was pretty obvious (Score:2)
That is what you were talking about, right?
Rob
And people say linux is hard to work with.... (Score:5, Insightful)
A "Vista Certified" device that:
A)Is incredibly difficult to get to install, and
B)Results in repeatable on-boot BSODs, and
C)Is incredibly difficult to get to uninstall, *and*
D)Leaves packages on your HD after uninstall that cause repeatable on-boot BSODs.
Either the Vista (display) driver development process is as much of an after-thought as Linux driver development, or Vista's "NEW AND INNOVATIVE" hardware environment is so incredibly buggy that wrestling with all the necessary work arounds is a very difficult task.
My guess? The new Vista driver model is so overly complex that developers will have a hard time working with it indefinitely. Either development budgets will have to go up (unlikely, for ATI and Nvidia, at least), or hardware release cycles will have to slow. Given that Vista has been in *public* development for such a long time (Betas & Release candidates), I'm guessing there is a systematic problem to driver development that most hardware companies cannot adapt to.
Take a look at this: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=357 [pcper.com]
"Finally, the complexity of these drivers is simply astounding. Diercks claimed that each of the six drivers that NVIDIA has to develop for Windows Vista is roughly 20 million lines of code long; about as much code as Windows NT 4! While I am sure there is some significant driver overlap between the six separate modules and the 20 million lines on each, projects of that magnitude are something most normal people couldnt even begin to wrap their heads around. "
Consider that Vista contains approximately 50 million lines of code, and took 5+ years to develop. Consider that Linux Kernel 2.6.0 was 6 million lines of code, and contains *thousands* of drivers.
Now, does this mean that Vista driver programmers are simply going to give up, Vista will collapse, and we'll all switch to another OS? Of course not; these companies *will* manage to overcome the overly complex development environment, and will create working drivers. In Time.
What we may see, however, is that Linux drivers will start improving faster than Windows drivers; and I can even potentially forsee a day when the Linux binary video drivers beat Vista drivers to the punch, in terms of properly supporting newer hardware. Architectural problems don't necessarily cause development to fail, but serious organizational difficulties impact release cycle, and result in more annoyance and security bugs.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Linux: ~12 MB
NT4: ~13 MB
XP: ~40 MB
Vista: ~53 MB
An expensive revenue stream for MS (Score:3, Informative)
This forces out smaller companies of many markets, since the majority of Windows home and even business users are ignorant to the actual process (with good reason of course, they don't know any better). If you're trying to market a product to Windows users, if they don't see that magic "compliant (approved, bought out, bribed, etc..)" logo on the product, it's a lost sale.
The program is a total joke.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What's the fuzz about? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
If the drivers don't drive 'er, I certainly would.