Slashdot Mirror

Heck, if JPEG2000 and MP3Pro can't catch on, what makes them think this will?

If you were a developer, which format would you rather use? An old format that requires you to pay money to use it? Or a new one that doesn't?

Does it do that when you update via the Baseline Security Analyzer also? http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/tools/mb sahome.mspx

Concerned about privacy? When you check for updates, basic information about your computer, not you, is used to determine which updates your programs need. To learn more, see our privacy statement.

"In the Privacy Statement of Windows Update Microsoft grants itself fairly far-reaching rights... By way of justifying Microsoft's approach, alexkoc writes that the EULA, likewise presented by the WGA installer, also covered the relaying of such information."

So I guess it might be a bit sneaky, but it has all been covered by WGA disclosures.

An example of the XML returned when a user cancels an installation is available here, "just to allay any fears that Microsoft is using any personal information".

So ya, I don't think this is a huge deal, nor particularly unexpected.

I made a fairly determined effer to see if we could bring up a manageable lab with IPv6.
1) Our local provide (XO) doesn't even offer public IPv6 address space.
2) ARIN wants thousands of dollars PER YEAR for portable address space.
3) Identifying what/how-to use a substitute for the deprecated "site-local" addressing. Tracking this down took days of searching and piecing things together. All the docs agreed that site-local was deprected but rarely mentioned what was going to take its place. Here is some links to what was found, MS has surprising helpful documentation:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/network/evaluate/ technol/tcpipfund/tcpipfund_ch03.mspx#EDAAE
http://book.itzero.com/read/cisco/0602/Cisco.Press .Deploying.IPv6.Networks.Feb.2006_html/1587052105/ ch02lev1sec1.html
Generate a global ID with either of the tools below:
http://www.kame.net/~suz/gen-ula.html
http://www.hznet.de/tools/generate-rfc4193-addr
Additionally it is nearly impossible to control the allocation of hosts to specific suffixes. We often organize customers address space so that global catalog for each site are at, say, .5, exchange at .7, proxy server at .13, etc using DHCP static leases, it make life easier on our field techs, they know exactly where key pieces of infrastructure are for troubleshooting. We can send them to different customers and they have an ingrained familiarity of how things are configured. Currently MS IPV6 does not have a usable IPv6 DHCP server, and the IPv6 clients do not allow such an address assignment even if the server could do reservations.
In a nutshell, IPv6 tools and implementation on hosts fall far short of the enterprise tools used define and organize a LAN for IPv4 and until ease of use is at least on par with MS IPv4 DHCP point/click environment it is going to continue to languish. It absolutely must have integrated DHCP server redundancy with automatic failover/failback/sync so sorely lacking, LO these many years in MS offerings.

I'm not sure what is more screwed up the article linked to about the drives or the Slashdot comment.

ReadyDrive is NOT ReadyBoost, but it IS STILL a MS Technology and is designed to work directly with Vista.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsv ista/features/details/performance.mspx

Also why does the linked article and Slashdot dismiss these drives as having nothing to do with Vista, when in fact they were DESIGNED Specifically to be used with Vista and employ MS Vista technology in the hardware?

Is Slashdot trying to become the misinformation site of the Internet?

http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20070307PR201.ht ml

http://www.channelinsider.com/article/Samsung+Ship s+Worlds+First+Hybrid+HDD151or+Is+It/202621_1.aspx

"Optimized to work in Windows Vista-capable notebook PCs, Samsung's MH80 is a 2.5-inch hybrid hard drive with 128 or 256MB of flash memory. It combines a hard disk drive with a OneNAND Flash cache and Microsoft's ReadyDrive software, offering faster boot and resume times, increased battery life and greater reliability compared to traditional magnetic media technology, the spokesperson claimed. "

Sorry slashdot, but these drives are designed for Vista. Sure they may offer performance improvements in other OSes, but will see the majority of performance gains in Vista. Also even when used with other OSes, the way the Drives internally manage the Flash caching is from MS, so thank them the next time you boot your Linux laptop with one of these drives.

As for the other questions people have about the limited write times of Flash RAM, etc, go lookup MS Superfetch technology which specifically addresses these issues by writing to various locations in the Flash space, since this this is also how these drives work to ensure the same bits don't always get used, giving the flash cache the equivalent or greater lifetime than the HD platters.

I know this is SlashDot, but someone could get the fact right once, right?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/robotics/

(Evil Empire is just what we call them...)

MSIDC isn't based in Bangalore, but in Hyderabad, some 600 km away.

As for 'preventing' hiring of highly-paid American citizens, I'm glad you think only American citizens should have the oppurtunity to be hired by Microsoft and such companies. At least you're clear about your xenophobia.

Here's a thought: the US is not the only market that MS operates under.

Microsoft already has research centers in Bangalore, Beijing and Cambridge,
not forgetting Redmond and Silicon Valley.

Microsoft have a policy of not employing software engineers over 30 - apparently, according to Bill Gates, a software engineers skills peak at age 26, and goes downhill from then on.

Microsoft already has research centers in Bangalore, Beijing and Cambridge,
not forgetting Redmond and Silicon Valley.

Microsoft have a policy of not employing software engineers over 30 - apparently, according to Bill Gates, a software engineers skills peak at age 26, and goes downhill from then on.

Microsoft already has research centers in Bangalore, Beijing and Cambridge,
not forgetting Redmond and Silicon Valley.

Microsoft have a policy of not employing software engineers over 30 - apparently, according to Bill Gates, a software engineers skills peak at age 26, and goes downhill from then on.

Microsoft already has research centers in Bangalore, Beijing and Cambridge,
not forgetting Redmond and Silicon Valley.

Microsoft have a policy of not employing software engineers over 30 - apparently, according to Bill Gates, a software engineers skills peak at age 26, and goes downhill from then on.

Microsoft already has research centers in Bangalore, Beijing and Cambridge,
not forgetting Redmond and Silicon Valley.

Microsoft have a policy of not employing software engineers over 30 - apparently, according to Bill Gates, a software engineers skills peak at age 26, and goes downhill from then on.

I'd hardly call it english. Legalise really is its own form of code.

I think the GP's point stands, it'd be useful to have some sort of independent QA organization that would validate a bill against its intent.

The GPL is a distribution license. If you're doing anything that causes it to apply to you, you're no longer an "average consumer!"

How is flipstart different from this.

* 1.1 Games Explorer Integration
* 1.2 Support Parental Controls
* 1.3 Support Rich Saved Games
* 1.4 Support the Xbox 360 Common Controller for Windows
* 1.5 Support Multiple Aspect Ratios and Resolutions
* 1.6 Support Launch from Windows Media Center
* 1.7 Direct3D Support

Groove Home Page

Building an Emergency Operations Center on Groove and SharePoint

Infopath Home Page Create and manage electronic forms.

Groove Home Page

Building an Emergency Operations Center on Groove and SharePoint

Infopath Home Page Create and manage electronic forms.

Groove Home Page

Building an Emergency Operations Center on Groove and SharePoint

Infopath Home Page Create and manage electronic forms.

GNU/Linux

1. Microsoft attempt to compete with GNU/Linux via conventional methods: reducing cost (releasing free--as in beer--versions of products), advertising that TCO is higher for Linux than Windows (it's a lie, but what else should we expect them to say?)
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. ...
4. Profit!

Google

1. Microsoft attempts to compete with Google via conventional methods: producing a competing services with similar capabilities. Then advertise the services as usual, and throw in a bit of IE7 integration in the name of 'choice'.
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. Throw chair across room
4. ...
5. Profit!

Personally am getting a feeling of: 'same bilge, different day' from Microsoft.

GNU/Linux

1. Microsoft attempt to compete with GNU/Linux via conventional methods: reducing cost (releasing free--as in beer--versions of products), advertising that TCO is higher for Linux than Windows (it's a lie, but what else should we expect them to say?)
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. ...
4. Profit!

Google

1. Microsoft attempts to compete with Google via conventional methods: producing a competing services with similar capabilities. Then advertise the services as usual, and throw in a bit of IE7 integration in the name of 'choice'.
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. Throw chair across room
4. ...
5. Profit!

Personally am getting a feeling of: 'same bilge, different day' from Microsoft.

GNU/Linux

1. Microsoft attempt to compete with GNU/Linux via conventional methods: reducing cost (releasing free--as in beer--versions of products), advertising that TCO is higher for Linux than Windows (it's a lie, but what else should we expect them to say?)
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. ...
4. Profit!

Google

1. Microsoft attempts to compete with Google via conventional methods: producing a competing services with similar capabilities. Then advertise the services as usual, and throw in a bit of IE7 integration in the name of 'choice'.
2. Conventional methods fail so Microsoft falls-back to good old fashioned dirty tricks: making spurious allegations about 'intellectual property'.
3. Throw chair across room
4. ...
5. Profit!

Personally am getting a feeling of: 'same bilge, different day' from Microsoft.

It's pretty funny all this fuss about DST changes. Here in Brazil we had to cope with DST changes almost every year for the last 20 years, and by now we pretty much got used to it, on our daily lives and when developing or maintaining computer systems. Every system administration knows that he'll have to update the tz database year, or update the Windows registry accordingly.

I guess that's proof that in adversity, we thrive. Thanks to the screwed up economy we had a few decades ago, we know have one of the most advanced banking systems in the world. Thanks to retarded DST policies, we learned how to adapt from that :)

It's fascinating how slashdot still prefers opinions to facts.

I downloaded the odfconverter-1.0.0-2.oxt file and tried to install into OpenOffice.org 2.1.0 for Windows (as downloaded from openoffice.org web site, not the Novell version).

I had to use Tools -> Extension manager (not Package manager), and when installing, had several pop-ups stating "This media-type is not supported: application/octet-stream". OKing these showed the odfconverter installed into "My extensions". And "Microsoft Word 2007 Document (.docx)" was added to the list of files in File -> Open.

But trying to open a .docx file (the Windows Vista Product Guide failed, with nothing happening or displayed.

Anyone want to try the other options of Linux, OO.o 2.0.4, Novel OO.o 2.0.4 and report back?

I think that was the month they wrote the IEMac design docs, bringing about the destruction of the internet and the worm eating Apple from the inside out. At least until the contract expired and they went on Safari.

But seriously IEMac4 sucked.

But seriously IEMac5 was ahead of its time.

It's strange, Tantek and Jimmy are the only men at Microsoft besides Bill Gates that I'd like to shake hands with, then punch in the mouth. Thanks guys. ;-)

(Yes, you'd better believe I still have to test my designs with it...)

strongly believe that doing it the baby steps way is good because it allows me to smoothly transition from MS to linux instead of sitting in front of the computer with a huge question mark over my head trying to not only figure out how the OS works but not even knowing how to do a simple "hello world" page, let alone a complete web site.

Whilst this doesn't suite the impatience of most /. readers (we expect you to spend five minutes switching away from Microsoft, for you to be productive immediately, and a to write a nice note here telling all the people that replied to your question how wonderful they are) it does seem like a very sensible policy.

There are a couple of things you need to know about Mono and Ubuntu in general:

• The Mono Project is developed by Novell, they have a patent cross-license agreement with The Evil Empire. This has resulted in a lot of FUD and sabre-rattling, which could have a some effect (I am not a lawyer, so don't know what that effect might be) on the Mono project.
• When you want to download mono etc. don't think like a Windows user and get it directly from the Web site. Open up 'Synaptic Package Manager' and install from there. It's in the Sytem menu (I believe, am not a GNOME user :) )
• Mono has a small webserver that comes with it. This will be good to get you started and for testing, but for production applications you should use the 'mod_mono' module for Apache. Again, all this juicy goodness can be found by searching in Synaptic.
• All configuration files for this stuff can be found in the /etc directory--making changes without a GUI might seem strange at first, but believe me it makes much, much more sense than GUI + Registry. For a start think how easy it is to backup settings, or even clone your server configuration.

Hope this helps.

* March 1987: An article by Nancy Andrews of Microsoft.

* 1.0 June 1992: Word (for Windows) v2

* 1.1 Unknown, unavailable

* 1.2 Unknown, unavailable

* 1.3 January 1994: Word v6

* 1.4 September 1995: Word v7 (Word 95)

* 1.5 April 1997: Word v8 (Word 97)

* 1.6 May 1999: Word v9 (Word 2000)

* 1.7 August 2001: Word v10 (Word 2002)

* 1.8 April 2004: Word v11 (Word 2003)

The above list happens to be more complete than any Microsoft document, for example way back in 2006 see here.

If it's not a threat then why is Microsoft 'partnerning' with Novell to get SLED in the door at Wal-mart, in the process giving Linspire the big heave-ho.

'By dropping software from Microsoft and avoiding "Intel inside," retailer Wal-Mart Stores is offering a $199 computer it says is a hot seller on its Web site', Dec 2002

Microsoft and Novell Alliance Embraced by Wal-Mart, Jan. 22, 2007

'MS won't care if everybody uses the ODF standard, because at the end of the day, just like with Windows, people will continue buying their software in large numbers because'

How do people get to choose their software when the OEM contract with Microsoft prevents them from selling any other OS, else they are penalized with higher prices. The last time DELL tried to get into the LInux Desktop market MS moved very quickly to shut it down.

'A PC dealer in Europe has begun selling Dell desktop computers equipped with Linux, but Dell has distanced itself from the announcement, saying that the systems were customized by the dealer, and that it is not the first time a reseller has loaded Linux onto Dell computers'

'Questar claims that in the 24 hours since it began shipping the Linux computers, which can be delivered to 20 countries in Europe, its Web site has received over 200,000 hits'

'The question remains, why devote 150 staff to a business unit, spend millions investing in start-ups, only to can the exercise a few weeks later?'

'Lewis Mettler sums up the story from trial documents'

'Microsoft held a series of meetings with Dell in regard to Linux'

'Dell in June of 2001 informs Microsoft that Dell has canceled their Linux business unit'

was: Not necessarily a "threat" at all (Score:1, Insightful)

ps: I'd prefer to be a 'zealot' rather than a bought and paid for media whore like you ..

OS/2 most certainly did suffer that problem and was quite infamous for it (30 seconds Googling for "Single Input Queue problem" should tell you that).

MS's OSes still suffer that problem, especially if you use some of the legacy APIs (ie, old apps).

No, they don't.

OK, I'll admit I was wrong on OS/2's single input queue. They fixed it in the versions I ran though with a work around. So it seemed like I didn't have that problem.

However, you're wrong as well. Windows NT certainly did have a single input queue, albeit an "OS only" queue, it still can lock up the entire system.

No, it didn't. OS/2 and Windows NT came from _completely_ different code bases. They shared an API - you could run text mode OS/2 apps in early releases of NT - but that's the closest they came to having "common components"[0].

Again incorrect - there was support for HPFS (which MS owned rights to), the OS/2 1.x API, and even OS/2's PM API.

You are thinking of NT's "API personalities", which were designed in from that start as modular chunks that could be activated and deactivated at will (win32 is implemented the same way). They were a result of its microkernel-ish architecture, not of any "OS/2 heritage".

The only "personalities" I recall being talked about at that time were IBM's OS personalities running on top of their microkernel architecture. IIRC, they demoed a single box running NT, OS/2 and RISC 6000 OS personalities on different monitors.

As for the "modular" APIs, I believe all but POSIX is completely gone now. If they were truly modular, why did no one other than MS ever release a module? (I can't think of one, Cygwin is an installed program after all)

You're correct in that OS/2 2.x was radically different from NT (VMS) in design. It was far superior, and by 2.3 had a GUI and performance I have yet to see matched by anyone, including Mac OSX.

It was most certainly not superior (and OS X is hardly a performance benchmark to strive for, it's probably the slowest mainstream OS around). OS/2 had a monolithic kernel, wasn't portable, was single user (so nothing even as basic as filesystem permissions, let alone the pervasive security model of NT), didn't support multiple processors (although that was hacked into some specialised builds), still had significant subsystems that were still 16 bit, even into the mid-90s, had poor memory management (no dynamically-sizing disk cache, for example), etc, etc.

It had a hybrid kernel, not quite monolithic, not quite micro. The HPFS filesystem was a stripped down system for a single box. It was the only common 16 bit piece still running in OS/2 2.3 onward. It could be replaced with HPFS386, which was 32 bit and solved most of your other observations (you'd need some of the additional server modules to run true multi-user on a box)

And exactly what "pervasive security model" permeates NT? The one that allows random code to run and modify files everywhere? That's some security.

And then let's get to where it was superior - the threading model. A truly pre-emptive threading model versus the time-slice. MS still has issues with the time slice, even though it's down to 16ms in XP.

Windows NT was superior to OS/2 in pretty much every conceivable way. Which it should have been, given that - as the original poster noted - it was built to replace OS/2.

Hence Microsoft stating that NT should be rebooted at least once a week (Exchange Servers) and once a month (others) vs OS/2 systems that just ran and ran... (running Sendmail, I might add)

It required less (OS/2 was tolerable on a machine with 6MB RAM, NT required at least 10MB) - but that's hardly surprising since it wasn't _doing_ anywhere near as much.

No wonder your experience was horrible. I wouldn't dream of running it on less than

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914387

or you can use ours...
ftp://ftp.prophetsys.com/Drivers/DST/DSTtool.exe ...provided without warranty, responsibility, or any representations of any particular function, do not use, sacrifice a chicken in the name of FSM, etc., etc.... please don't smite the server and get me fired...

Bear in mind that it does nothing whatsoever to resolve issues arising from programs scheduling things during the whole transition, or networks that require a central timekeeping source, or anything else mentioned in other posts. It just and only fixes your daylight savings database and current timezone settings. No restart needed, how nice.

By the way, radio automation is one of those time-sensitive systems that get really finniky about DST. This tool plays nice with our systems (because they are already designed to read DST from windows), but it might just break yours.

MS already has published an unautomatted fix for Windows 2000. See KB914387.

In short, you have two choices. use the tzedit utility to modify the dates and times of when the OS thinks the clocks should change, or apply the suggested reg changes mentioned in the KB article to modify the settings for you.

You can automate this process yourself in about 2 minutes. I wrote a script that we pushed out via group policy to about 25 Windows 200 servers just this week. In fact, did it during production hours while everything was running. If pushing this via GP is not an option for you, you could automate and deploy this yourself many different ways.

Uhm, I think you're confused. Windows NT based OSes at least (and I assume Win9x as well) keep track of time in # of seconds since Midnight January 1st, 1970 UTC just like like any C-based OS would. Check msdn if you don't believe me: GetSystemTime

The issue is only relevant for applications which need to do things in local time such as Outlook appointments or financial transactions where the user interacts in local time.

In any case, the title is extremely misleading. Any product still in support has a free patch. Only out of support products have pay fixes, as per their license agreements.

11. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY. The software is licensed "as-is." You bear the risk of using it. Microsoft gives no express warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which this agreement cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, Microsoft excludes the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.

12. LIMITATION ON AND EXCLUSION OF REMEDIES AND DAMAGES. You can recover from Microsoft and its suppliers only direct damages up to U.S. $5.00. You cannot recover any other damages, including consequential, lost profits, special, indirect or incidental damages. This limitation applies to
anything related to the software, services, content (including code) on third party Internet sites, or third party programs; and
claims for breach of contract, breach of warranty, guarantee or condition, strict liability, negligence, or other tort to the extent permitted by applicable law.
It also applies even if Microsoft knew or should have known about the possibility of the damages.

Practice/Theory delta. As another poster replied, it's the clients. Everything has to be done in a precise order or the pooch is screwed. You can see for yourself here http://support.microsoft.com/gp/dst_topissues

There are two registry keysets: Timezones and localtime.
If all you have are 2k servers humping MSSQL and print services, it can all be done with reg scripts and $4k is a ripoff.

The Exchange guys where I work took the *easy* way out and upgraded to AD 2k3 and Exchange 2k7. It was cheaper that way.

Huh? How does that happen, assuming you're a good boy and using timestamps in UTC in the first place? You know, the ones that look like "Sat, 3 Mar 2007 08:06:08 -0800 (PST)", the ones you find in e-mail headers for example?

The problem is when that gets interpreted to the local machine.

Let's say you schedule the above meeting during the DST change. If I don't have the update, when I get the alert, it will be an hour off because the calculation to local time will take into account the DST rules for you, but not for me.

Here's a little more info on the DST thing and MS.

This is absurd. Just go here and follow the instructions.

Three steps.

1. Create .reg file by copy/pasting from that page.
2. Create .vbs file by copy/pasting from that page.
3a. Create GPO to import reg key and run VBScript on Win2k machines at Startup.
or
3b. In absence of AD, modify script to copy itself and .reg file to all Win2k machines and apply fix.

If you're such a small organization that you don't have an I.T. group.. then.. it's probably simple to use TZEdit to update your piddly network.

For fun, you can trick out the script to make sure it only runs once.

This fee is all inclusive. That means any product in extended support, and any DST related patch.

So that includes:
    Windows 2000 Server straight DST patch
    Windows 2000 CRT DST patch (Never heard of that one? See here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932955/en-us/ and here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932590/en-us/
    Exchange running on W2K
    Visual Studio 6.0 patches (I believe...)

So $4000 to cover *all* unsupported systems, and to have a human to call and say "Your patch screwed up my server" and have them fix it, is to be cliche, Priceless

This fee is all inclusive. That means any product in extended support, and any DST related patch.

So that includes:
    Windows 2000 Server straight DST patch
    Windows 2000 CRT DST patch (Never heard of that one? See here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932955/en-us/ and here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932590/en-us/
    Exchange running on W2K
    Visual Studio 6.0 patches (I believe...)

So $4000 to cover *all* unsupported systems, and to have a human to call and say "Your patch screwed up my server" and have them fix it, is to be cliche, Priceless

Microsoft themselves also offer a free solution for Windows 2000 servers. Perhaps this takes a bit more work than an official patch would, but if you've got so many 2000 servers that you'd consider dropping $4k on a patch, chances are you've got Active Directory or at least an admin with the skills to script a rollout of a reg file with this fix.

I've been using tzedit.exe (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914387) for manually updating a few old pc's

MS themselves provide a registry editing based fix for this - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914387

This service is not the same, this is actual patches to the applications for those that dont want to make the fixes any other way. By the sound of it, this is quite generous - the $4,00 charge only applies to applications out of their 5 year support period.

You could in at least 2000 and forward. I never had experience doing this in 95 or 98 but it still might have been possible. You will need to create an unattended installation answer file. This file will allow you to selectively choose what feature you want to install. It was also the preferred way in XP to move the Documents and Settings folder to a different drive other than C without using registry hacks.

You can read about doing this with Microsoft's guide at: http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsVista/en/libr ary/88f80cb7-d44f-47f7-a10d-e23dd53bc3fa1033.mspx? mfr=true and there is also a user forum where people are discussing this and you can ask questions if you need help at: http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showforum=149.

Setting up an unattended installation isn't child's play. I recommend doing test installs in a Virtual Machine first to make sure everything is working as you selected. Do note that you will need to perform multiple installations before you get everything setup as you want. This is because you'll aways forget something and need to go back.

You can find out by following the instructions at
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/298837

Holy crap. You should be able to pull up that information right from the device manager, really. Bad microsoft for not making it as accesible as, say UnknownDevices does. Why that KnowledgeBase article doesn't just point you to the freeware tool is any one's guess.

My latest problem with linux was last month when I decided to download the latest Fedora ISO to install on an old P3 500 box I had sitting in the closet. Guess what? It couldn't even get more than about 20 seconds into the installation process!

You should start writing your own drivers for Vista... but wait where is my Vista compatible compiler?

Right here. You'll also need to grab the Windows Driver Kit. Then you're all set.

OK, well, you're all set if you're only using a 32 bit machine. If you have a 64 bit machine, you might want to consider giving up instead.

You should start writing your own drivers for Vista... but wait where is my Vista compatible compiler?

Right here. You'll also need to grab the Windows Driver Kit. Then you're all set.

OK, well, you're all set if you're only using a 32 bit machine. If you have a 64 bit machine, you might want to consider giving up instead.

You should start writing your own drivers for Vista... but wait where is my Vista compatible compiler?

Right here. You'll also need to grab the Windows Driver Kit. Then you're all set.

OK, well, you're all set if you're only using a 32 bit machine. If you have a 64 bit machine, you might want to consider giving up instead.

MSDNAA? Is that the new MS anti-piracy division? Kinda like the MS equivelent of the MPAA or RIAA? I had to ask ^_~

About being certified by MS...I'm not sure where you are getting your information from, but it is wrong.

Want to develop drivers for Vista, Server 2003, XP, W2k, and possibly older MS platforms? Hit the download button from here http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/devtools/ddk/default .mspx/.

Want a kernel debugger and access to the O/S symbol files? Try here http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/devtools/debugging/d efault.mspx.

Need some know-how on passing the Windows logo requirements? Try here http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/whql/WHQLdwn.mspx

How about 64-bit Vista drivers? Well, those have to be digitally signed. Try here for more info http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/64bi t/kmsigning.mspx

Total cost to you: Zero. Well, that certificate for signing the 64-bit drivers costs money, but that's not going to MS.

I understand the general /. attitude towards most things MS, but at least try to get the facts straight before you spread FUD around.