Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Operating Systems Software Windows Hardware

Does the Windows Logo Mean Anything? 175

Posted by kdawson
from the certify-this dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Does the Windows Logo Mean Anything?

Comments Filter:
  • Not for a home user (Score:1, Interesting)

    by AmIAnAi (975049) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:57PM (#18648569)
    If I buy a piece of hardware and it doesn't have certified drivers, so what. Once I've bought it, I'm not going to take it back to the store because of the drivers.


    In the past the biggest problem I've had with drivers are those for NVIDIA video cards.

    It would be interesting to know if someone doing a big system roll-out for 100+ users takes more note of driver certification.

  • by rockrat (104803) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:05PM (#18648641)
    Given that new Macs run Windows (and Apple's BootCamp includes windows drivers for much of the Apple-specific hardware), and that most of Apple's (or other vendor's) peripherals also work with Windows (it's all USB now, anyways), I'd be surprised if you could walk into an Apple store and find much that didn't work with Windows.
  • by BoRegardless (721219) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:13PM (#18648721)
    I have run out of time in solving Windows problems, no matter what flavor. There is simply too much to put up with and guard against, and the average user doesn't understand and won't study up and remember. It is too time consuming for them and me.

    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:Isn't it obvious? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rucs_hack (784150) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:18PM (#18648775)
    they've tried this in so many forms. Recall that Microsoft update was, in it's original incarnation, meant to be *the* portal for drivers/hardware utilities from hardware manufacturers, update to windows itself was an aspect, but not the only one.
    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.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:24PM (#18648829)
    What the hell are you trying to say. While I hate winmodem as much as anyone, the first part of you posts makes no sense.

    And what if windows OS is "widely supported". Does it means that the OS is "craptasic" in nature? You make it sounds as if "widely supported" = bad thing.

    These are engineered trade off. If you want to use an absolutely stable OS with (relatively) little hardware support, use BSD. Windows are designed so that it can be extended easily. Yes it creates misery among ITs professionals, but from the consumers' point of view, they like it. This is why you don't see BSD/Linux overtaking Windows. Consumers _like_ simplicity. They don't want to use ndiswrapper. They don't want to configure their x windows. They only want the damn hardware work as soon as they plug it in. Can you do it with other OSes?

    Gosh I can't believe I am defending Windows.
  • Windows Tax? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MarkByers (770551) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @03:21PM (#18649353) Homepage Journal
    Tax? Microsoft is no longer the monopoly it once was. It's now easy to avoid paying for Windows, so calling it a tax is unfair.

    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).
  • by WheelDweller (108946) <.WheelDweller. .at. .gmail.com.> on Saturday April 07, 2007 @04:16PM (#18649945)
    Just try bootlegging it and see! :)

          Like that other poster, I just always assumed it meant they PAID Microsoft, not that it certified anything. I wasted THREE HOURS getting a simple Creative Webcam 3 working on Win98; I took the thing upstairs on a Linux box, and it had created the device, and was waiting on me to open the video! Sometimes they didn't get/keep all the .DLLs on those Compaqs...

  • by Technician (215283) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @04:19PM (#18649973)
    If you make a disparaging remark about Windows, even when true, you will get modded down in a BIG way.

    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.
  • by Stormx2 (1003260) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @05:19PM (#18650493)
    I'll take the bait. I don't like replying to cowards but I will anyway

    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 ...thing... that just isn't possible

    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.
  • by BoRegardless (721219) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @05:52PM (#18650763)
    Indeed I shortened my list of problems, where malware dumped on the PC from various web based exploits seem to be at the root of lots of problems, some of which then cause various malfunctions (possibly because of badly written malware).

    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.
  • WHQL.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Junta (36770) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @07:56PM (#18651511)
    I've worked with some products before and despite not in any way being responsible for Windows working, I have been greatful for WHQL certification on occasion. I'll discover a problem which needs to be fixed, and unless absolutely completely unable to dodge the issue, they'll ignore it and push back on it to get the product out the door. Then, magically, some one on the Windows side of the company has a WHQL test fail due to my issue, and it suddenly becomes a show stopper.

    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.
  • by Technician (215283) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @10:02PM (#18652311)
    I think most such keymaps are not produced by the companies themselves, but by the OS community.

    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 their own drivers do provide compatiblilty lists and drivers online. A good example is Intel who has released Linux drivers for much of their Centrino Mobile Technology tm. products.

    Some of their older hardware is still unsupported and probably never will. Not enough demand. For example some of their webcams and other toys.
  • by Ambassador Kosh (18352) on Sunday April 08, 2007 @03:33AM (#18653837)
    If you think that this future of the linux video drivers being better then the windows ones in the future then think again. It already happened. The nvidia 8800 series drivers are currently more stable under linux for both 32bit and 64bit versions then the windows xp, xp64, vista and vista64 versions of the drivers are. Those drivers also came out on the day the card came out. At the rate things are going it will be a year before the vista or xp drivers for the 8800 cards to be as good as the linux driver is.

    Darned if I know why it is true but it is definitely my experience and the experience of many others. I guess there is just something about making drivers for linux that is just vastly easier then doing them for xp and vista. It is not just video drivers though, lots of high end hardware works better under linux then under windows. Get almost any dual cpu motherboard that supports 4GB+ of ram and see how well windows supports stuff versus linux.

An inclined plane is a slope up. -- Willard Espy, "An Almanac of Words at Play"

Working...