On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 02:25:04PM -0400, Adam Maas scripsit: > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Graydon<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 02:01:00PM -0400, Adam Maas scripsit: > >> When it comes down to it, Vista had 3 problems at launch: > >> > >> 1. Poor hardware support at Launch (Windows 7 also ahs this, but not > >> _quite_ as bad as Vista). This is totally not MS's fault as Vista > >> beta's were available via MSDN long before launch. > > > > Doesn't mean the betas would run on just any hardware, or were stable > > with respect to the hardware they would run on. > > > > A lot of the problem was an attempt to make Vista secure versus media > > copying, and this had to be extended to the drivers and was not ideally > > well explained by Microsoft to the folks writing drivers. > > I'd have to disagree there. That almost entirely affected display > drivers, which was one area where Vista really never had much in the > way of issues even at launch.
It affected all of the drivers in that the new driver qualification and signing mechanism put into place was there for all drivers, not just the media drivers. I was, at the time, walking into work past various of the shambling zombies producing some of those display drivers (and audio!). It was an enormous and very expensive effort. It also resulted in darn-near reverse engineering the Vista driver mechanism to get drivers that would sign, and in any firm that didn't have dozens of engineers to throw at the problem, that wasn't going to happen. So I think Microsoft's lack of clear explanation of "here are the new driver requirements" was a big issue for the Vista launch. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
