Vista Upgrade Matrix

Tyler Too writes "With six different versions of Vista due once it ships, figuring out an upgrade path can be confusing. Microsoft has tried to clear things up with a 4x6 matrix laying out your options. 'In short, users of XP Home can do an upgrade install to any of the four Vista versions. However, XP Pro users can only perform upgrade installs to Business or Ultimate.' And if you're not running a 32-bit version Windows XP, there's no upgrade path for you at all."

Comments

Some slight FUD in the summary...

[metasecure]

Some slight FUD in the summary, specifically the line that reads "And if you're not running a 32-bit version Windows XP, there's no upgrade path for you at all."

From TFA: "Note that the requirement for clean installs does not mean that the user is required to purchase a full version of the operating system. XP Pro, XP Pro x64 and Windows 2000 users will still be able to purchase the "upgrade edition" of any version of Vista. They just won't be able to upgrade with their existing files and settings in place."

Of course, personally I would reccomend doing a clean install no matter what version of Windows you currently have, so for me this is a moot point.

P.S. I thought timothy was assigned to Backslash articles! Why is he posting new news (twice today and we've had no backslashes!)? Hopefully he'll be able to summarize the interesting commentary that will no doubt ensue in an upcoming Backslash.

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[MooseMuffin]

While I agree with the parent in that you would be foolish not to do a clean install, it does seem backwards that someone who paid more for XP pro has to lose all their files while XP home users do not. It doesn't sound like a technical limitation at all.

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[Volante3192]

They probably figure anyone who bought Pro last time for their home computer would shell out for the shiny version next time around, cause "Pro -> Home" isn't an upgrade, oh no.

Well, they've got to make up some of their profit shortfall from the Euro fine...

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[jawtheshark]

it does seem backwards that someone who paid more for XP pro has to lose all their files while XP home users do not.

Perhaps because a Pro user would know what "backup" means? Home users are at the low end of the food chain, you don't expect anything of them. A Pro user knows that an upgrade is a bad thing and will upgrade and reinstall clean.

I've never seen an "Upgrade" of a Windows system go "cleanly". The only way to be sure is to install from scratch, or go Linux ;-)

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[VertigoAce]

If you do a clean install of Vista, all of your old programs and documents will be in c:\windows.old (or c:\windows.old.000, etc, if you do another clean install of Vista on top of itself). That directory will have your old Documents and Settings, Program Files, and Windows directories.

If your programs don't require anything outside of their program directory, they'll run just fine from windows.old. So even if you choose to do something strange like Pro -> Home, you could always copy things back and run setup.exe for each program again (choosing repair and let the installer fix registry settings, etc).

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[werewolf1031]

If your programs don't require anything outside of their program directory, they'll run just fine from windows.old.

True, BUT how many 3rd-party Windows programs do this? And I thought it was 'poor form' for a program to write ANY data to the Program Files folder or subfolders once installed? That's what Documents and Settings is for. So, only programs who violate this 'rule' will function properly after a new clean OS install without some tinkering.

you could always copy things back and run setup.exe for each program again (choosing repair and let the installer fix registry settings, etc)

Fair enough, but why require user to go through this? Really, since Windows is all about simplifying the user experience for the average person (experienced users will have no trouble with what you're saying), why not automate this process after the new installation. Perhaps present a list of old programs that the OS can "copy things back and run setup.exe for each program again" instead of requiring the user to go through this manually; let the user pick and choose which old apps to migrate from the windows.old directory. Sure, anybody here on /. can do those simple tasks in their sleep (from GUI *or* command line), but for Joe Average, it'd be a nice process to present. And it'd be highly appreciated by all of us in the nerd community who constantly get drafted as tech support by less-experienced friends and family. Just sayin'.

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[alc6379]

Perhaps because a Pro user would know what "backup" means? Home users are at the low end of the food chain, you don't expect anything of them. A Pro user knows that an upgrade is a bad thing and will upgrade and reinstall clean.

Not so.

Keep in mind that the word "Professional" can have a certain connotation to it. XP "Professional" will be used by doctors, lawyers, secretaries, accountants, etc. These people are "Professionals", and will want a "Professional" OS. But if I saw any of them holding a Windows installation disc near a booting PC, I'd slap their hand while yelling, "BAD MONKEY!!!"

Just because someone uses XP Pro, they're not automatically qualified to actually run/administer their PC.

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[jawtheshark]

doctors, lawyers, secretaries, accountants, etc.

Now, let's just forget doctors and lawyers for a second. Secretaries and accountants live in worlds where IT is managed for them and live in a Windows Domain, which is why one uses WinXP Pro. It's the biggest difference between Pro & Home. They have no business upgrading their works PCs in the first place.

Doctors and lawyers, may or may not live on a Windows Domain. If they do, then IT is managed for them and they have nu business upgrading. If they do not, then why did they pay for XP Pro? They don't need it!

The "Pro" part implies that there are qualified professionals doing they IT. It is not for "Professionals". I know it might be interpreted that way, but it really shouldn't.

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[PyroMosh]

No. Incorrect.

Many people incorrectly assume that Pro is "better" than home. There are if I remember correctly three differences. Encrypted file system, the ability to host a remote desktop session, and the ability to join a windows domain controller.

I sell PCs to consumers, and I get people almost daily who want pro because it's "better". I ask them what they're using their PC for, explain what they get with Pro over Home, then tell them the pricing difference. Most people stick with Home unless a school or business requires it. But occasionally, I get some fool with his money who wants pro even after being told the differences, when it's just going to be an MS Office box or an internet surfing box.

People do not understand. That's why the distinctions that MS is making this generation are a good thing.

Calling it "Business" instead of "Pro" is a good thing. Calling it "Home Basic" and "Home Premium" instead of just "Home" and "Media Center" will go a long way to alleviate some confusion.

Also, I suspect the fact that Business will be *missing* some of the entertainment features present in the home line will go a long way toward showing people that Business / Pro isn't "better" it's just aimed at a diffrent segment that has diffrent needs than the home user.

I still would have prefered something akin to "Vista Standard" and "Vista Corperate" but this is a good step none the less.

Re:Some slight FUD in the summary...

[alc6379]

The "Pro" part implies that there are qualified professionals doing they IT. It is not for "Professionals". I know it might be interpreted that way, but it really shouldn't.

You are correct, the "Pro" part shouldn't be interpreted in that manner. The problem, though, is that it is, much as I hate it. A "Professional" buys a laptop for PERSONAL use, and what do they get? Pro. There are numerous small workgroup-style offices of accountants, doctors, lawyers, etc, all with secretaries, who don't use domains (maybe with no more than 10 systems). Many of those people know just enough to get into trouble with their systems, others just call somebody when things break, not to maintain them in any way, shape, or form.

I certainly hope that since they quit calling it "Professional", and moved it to "Business", that's going to take care of some of this. Now, though, I expect to see quite a few "Ultimate" sales, just because it's "Ultimate", and the others aren't.

Let's face it. Consumers, as a whole, are dumb. If you put "NEW IMPROVED", "ULTIMATE", "BESTEST", or any of those type adjectives, they bite for it, because they don't want a substandard product.

Matrix, eh?

[CRCulver]

There is only one person who can save us from Vista: Neo.

Re:Matrix, eh?

[BlackCobra43]

You meanthat I can dodge BSODs?

No, when you're ready you won't hav...err...yes, you'll dodge BSODs.

Re:Matrix, eh?

[smaerd]

Do not try to install the new file system. That is impossible. Only try to understand the truth.
What's the truth?
There is no new file system.

Re:Matrix, eh?

[chrish]

Those last two movies sucked hard. I think I'll try Jobs instead (and probably keep booting into my existing XP until I get bored of the games I haven't finished yet.

Unless

[0racle]

Unless I can upgrade my XP Pro to an Ultimate Xtreem OMG edition I don't care.

Re:Unless

[Nom du Keyboard]

Unless I can upgrade my XP Pro to an Ultimate Xtreem OMG edition I don't care.

That will still leave you missing costly<<<<<<, er essential features in the OMB Ponies edition.

I am accursed of god (or microsoft)

[way2trivial]

I thought it would be NEAT to put XP64 on my newest workstation

I have since decided it was a mistake

I was sOOOOoo looking forward to escaping this bastardized ostracized (did I mention I also owned a ME laptop at onew point) dark stepchild OS of microsofts by upping it to vista...

now apparently, I can't even do that

Re:I am accursed of god (or microsoft)

[isaacklinger]

XP Pro, XP Pro x64 and Windows 2000 users will still be able to purchase the "upgrade edition" of any version of Vista. They just won't be able to upgrade with their existing files and settings in place.

If they can't keep their files and settings, in what sense is it an upgrade? Price?

Re:I am accursed of god (or microsoft)

[Valthan]

Yes, the "upgrade path" leads to a smaller price then the non upgrade (if you have anythign WIN2000 or a non MS product)

Re:I am accursed of god (or microsoft)

[obeythefist]

I've played around with 64bit Windows a few times and, remarkably enough, it suffers from all the same problems that Linux does! No decent driver support! The bulk of the driver support is for 32 bit Windows. As a result you get a pretty awful experience. 64 bit Windows takes away arguably the strongest advantage Windows has - everything just works.

Linux makes up for it, because while you have to wade through lines and lines of obscure config files and things, if you're Linus Torvalds you can possibly get the device to work for you. Windows on the other hand, you really have no chance!

Re:I am accursed of god (or microsoft)

[deceased comrade]

I tried XP 64 too. Nothing worked. Nothing was x64. I tried an Intel mac. Everything worked. Even what was PPC.

Re:I am accursed of god (or microsoft)

[Decker-Mage]

Yep, price is less than shelling out for Vista witchitymajig version. One thing the article didn't talk about is what happens when you have a corporate or volume license key, as I do. I imagine it gets even more fun (NOT!). Now I get to explain this to all my clients, although the home/pro matrix is a piece of cake by comparison.

Re:I am accursed of god (or microsoft)

[Anonymous Coward]

Shame you paid so much for the hardware though, eh?

What???

[tomstdenis]

No Gentoo upgrade path? :-)

Tom

Re:What???

[WilliamSChips]

If you have Gentoo, going to Vista would be a downgrade.

Re:What???

[$RANDOMLUSER]

No Gentoo upgrade path? :-)

Sure. Try:
emerge PureEvil

Re:What???

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG!! U made teh funny!!1!11!!

Re:What???

[Pulse_Instance]

I just upgraded my PCs at home from XP to Gentoo, no way am I downgrading to Vista.

Re:What???

[SillySnake]

It'll be a few days before things finish compiling.. then it'll be posted.

And I'm posting from Gentoo :-p

Re:What???

[eosp]

Mods, it's insightful, not funny.

Re:What???

[baadger]

Sure here are the steps:

1) emerge --unmerge portage
2) ...
3) Man I cannot believe you fell for that.

Re:What???

[level_headed_midwest]

Unless you are using Lynx from the live CD while installing, (or using the LiveCD installer) Gentoo must be already up and running on your box. Sure, the initial installation with all of KDE and whatnot can take a full day or two on a relatively slow box (PIII, Athlon Classisc/Tbird, Willy P4) but if it takes several days, you have to be running a Pentium 90 or something that has less power than your cell phone. But if you're posting, you're likely just doing updates and those generally take just a few minutes. I should know- both my machines run Gentoo.

Upgrade Matrix Is Flawed

[Doomedsnowball]

I see they "conveniently" left out the boxes where you upgrade to linux instead.

More Money for us!

[Kranfer]

This Matrix also seems to say that if you spent the extra money in the past for the professional software you MUST pay more again in the future. I don't like that.

Re:More Money for us!

[Anonymous Coward]

Only if you want an easy upgrade. Otherwise, you can still use the cheaper upgrade edition, but you'd have to do a "clean" install.

Re:More Money for us!

[Overzeetop]

Most compaines won't let you "downgrade" during a revision cycle. The business version will probably have the same extras that XP Pro has, and Home did not. Its for business, it costs more. Get over it - at least its deductible (if, of course, you're a business).

Re:More Money for us!

[Keith Russell]

RTFA after the chart. You can still pay the upgrade price for a "downgraded" version of Vista. You just won't get the option to upgrade in-place, and will be forced to make a clean install.

No great loss, if you ask me. (Which you didn't, but this is Slashdot.) In my experience, clean installs just work better, and the time you spend post-install is a sunk cost. You're either re-installing and transferring things to the clean install, or fixing what got broke by the in-place upgrade. Just choose the option that's better for your blood pressure.

Re:More Money for us!

[marcello_dl]

clean installs just work better

Then my several years old debian unstable installation should be unusable by now: a desktop moderately loaded with packages downloads 100 mb upgrades weekly (and packages are decompressed so i must have surely replaced more than 10Gb of stuff). Sure i got problems of configuration, sometimes. But no stability issues. If I reinstalled from scratch today, all I'd gain is a couple less warnings on boot, maybe.

However, in principle and especially on MS stuff parent is 100% right :)

Re:More Money for us!

[Lehk228]

we are talking about windows and the mess known as the system registry. linux works just fine as a continuously maintained system

Re:More Money for us!

[swb]

I'd never do an in-place out of choice, but there are times where you stumble across an older workstation during a larger project and time doesn't permit a clean install, or, you have some client who has "lost" install discs, licensing or other important info about an installed application yet has some critical need to upgrade to a newer Windows version.

Usually, though, it's the latter.

Can't find my version

[Anonymous Coward]

I have XP-Pirated. To which Vista version should I upgrade?

Re:Can't find my version

[PygmySurfer]

Windows Vista Ultimate 0-Day

Re:Can't find my version

[Overzeetop]

No mod points to give out, but this is likely the most accurate post-reply to the GP.

Re:Can't find my version

[Anonymous Coward]

0-day is old for an OS release, probably Windows Vista Ultimate RTM (Release to Manufacturer) will be first. It's the gold version, only shipped to system integrators like Dell etc., several weeks before the actual release. Windows 2000 was released on Feb 17, 2000 but I ran it before Christmas 1999. I ditched Win98SE and never looked back, was a buggy PoS for me, maybe driver issues but 2k didn't have them.

Re:Can't find my version

[kimvette]

Upgrade to BSD or Linux, then your conscience will be clear. By the way, on Linux we have great games. Tetris, Lbreakout, Tux Racer, The Gimp. . . bash

Re:Can't find my version

[mj_sklar]

Your logic entices me, sir. The GNU Image Manipulation Program is a game now? I find this very interesting and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Can't find my version

[Ash-Fox]

Your logic entices me, sir. The GNU Image Manipulation Program is a game now? I find this very interesting and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

I believe he got that joke from the Mac gamer video.

Re:Can't find my version

[kimvette]

You, sir, are correct. Kudos for catching the reference. :) The original source of the video is Red Vs. Blue

Huh

[Rorian]

Anyone see the Ubuntu -> Vista upgrade path?

Re:Huh

[Shawn is an Asshole]

That would be a downgrade, not an upgrade.

Re:Huh

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh man, you're so clever. Nobody's ever made that joke before.

Smash my Vista?

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, will be camping out Best Buy the night before to get my copy.

Re:Smash my Vista?

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, will be camping out at the Pirate Bay a week before it is released to get my copy.

Okay ... but what's the difference?

[powerlord]

Okay, I'm a geek and work in technology. I run WinXP Pro since I have a Domain at home (Samba 3), and it lets me play games and do work (yes, I also have another 2 machines runing Linux, and an OS X machine, its your typical 'mixed' development environment).

I see that they I can buy any upgrade copy and do a clean install (and if I upgraded I would go this route regardless), but has MS published anywhere what the differences between the different 'products' (and I use the term loosely), are?

With XP Home/Pro there were obvious descriptions of what parts were missing/added (depending on your point of view).

I haven't seen that (or don't remember seeing that), for the various flavours of Vista yet.

Re:Okay ... but what's the difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't quite a chart of the different versions, but it's got the information:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/edi tions/default.mspx

Re:Okay ... but what's the difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

You didn't look very hard. A quick search on Paul Thurrott's website gave me this, published in March.
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_edit ions_final.asp

Re:Okay ... but what's the difference?

[powerlord]

You didn't look very hard. A quick search on Paul Thurrott's website gave me this, published in March.
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_edit ions_final.asp

Thanks for the link, its very informative and exactly what I've been looking for.

Your right I suppose, I must not have looked too hard ... but, will the average consumer know to search on Paul Thurott's website?

Re:Okay ... but what's the difference?

[CastrTroy]

That's a lot of literature to go through. Anybody get a link to a point-list version of exactly what is different between the versions. No fluff, just straight and to the point. Kind of Like, Windows XP Home = 1,2,3. Windows XP Pro = 1,2,3 And IIS. I don't want to have to wade through tons of text to figure this stuff out.

Re:Okay ... but what's the difference?

[MojoStan]

... but, will the average consumer know to search on Paul Thurott's website?

I think the "average consumer" will only have two versions to choose from: (1) Vista Home Basic (like XP Home) and (2) Vista Home Premium (like XP Media Center Edition).

"Average" home office users will choose Vista Business, or it will be preinstalled on "business" PCs. Vista Enterprise is only available by volume licensing, so average users won't see it. Vista Ultimate isn't for "average" users and I don't expect to see it preinstalled on computers for "average" PC buyers.

I might be wrong, but I think (for the average consumer) choosing Vista versions will be simpler than choosing XP versions. Home Basic for the low-cost computers. Home Premium for the extra Media Center functions. Vista Business for the home office.

Re:Okay ... but what's the difference?

[WuphonsReach]

Hmmm... the whole disk encryption is only available for enterprise versions though? I would think the whole disk encryption would be popular in the laptop market.

Thank you for contacting Microsoft.

[PFI_Optix]

Please contact our piracy upgrade division via email at suemenow@microsoft.com

Obligatory

[squizzz]

Does it have something to do with this?

Complicated Matricies

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody can be told what the matrix is; you just have to try to run it for yourself.

Too bad stupid M$ can't upgrade like LINUX!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

apt-get upgrade

So easy! Why do people pay for M$$$? When u get linex for free!?!?!?!!? U R all sheepole, and I sh ould be crowned KING! i am so smart

Step up to real operating system!

Step up to Linex!

déjà vu

[neonprimetime]

Neo: Whoa. Déjà vu.
[Everyone freezes right in their tracks]
Trinity: What did you just say?
Neo: Nothing. Just had a little déjà vu.
Trinity: What did you see?
Cypher: What happened?
Neo: I had this operating system, and then another that looked just like it.
Trinity: How much like it? Was it the same OS?
Neo: It might have been. I'm not sure.
Morpheus: Switch! Apoc!
Neo: What is it?
Trinity: A déjà vu is usually a glitch in the Matrix. It happens when they change something.
Neo: What did they change?
Trinity: More OS versions.

Re:déjà vu

[x2A]

Oh my god, the Windows!!! They're locking us in!

Re:déjà vu

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahahaha! Very nice! :-)

Re:déjà vu

[mgblst]

No, it is ok. One was Vista and the other was MacOs. If you look really close you can tell that they are different. One is a fair bit older and more stable. The other is as fat as a cow.

Most accessible upgrade

[LotsOfPhil]

The "no hassle" (meaning, you don't have to worry if your old OS and the new one match up) is to get the (most expensive) Ultimate edition. I find that mildly interesting.

Re:Most accessible upgrade

[iainl]

That's because Ultimate is the only one that isn't missing features from any of the XP releases - it's got all the Domain networking and IIS stuff from XP Pro, plus all the PVR stuff from Media Centre Edition.

The other Vista versions are all missing one or the other, and so you can only do an 'in-place' upgrade where this doesn't strip features that you might be using.

Jumping the gun....

[EnderGT]

P.S. I thought timothy was assigned to Backslash articles! Why is he posting new news (twice today and we've had no backslashes!)? Hopefully he'll be able to summarize the interesting commentary that will no doubt ensue in an upcoming Backslash.

38 minutes later - the Backslash of Citizen Photographers v. The Police is up!

Why upgrades?

[antdude]

Why not do clean installs? It is messy when doing OS upgrades. I know, they can save time to keep installed software and stuff. However, it can show problems not seen with clean installs.

Re:Why upgrades?

[CastrTroy]

Because with windows, it's impossible to keep your settings (which are in the registry) and do a clean install. If they used a more sane unix type thing where all your settings are in /etc and /home, then it would be much easier to do a fresh install, without losing all your settings.

Only 32-bit, eh?

[barbazoo]

Didn't even know anyone still cared about 16-bit windows...

Finally!

[Anonymous Coward]

For once, I'm happy to be running XP Home...

Heh...

[teflaime]

I'm not upgrading to Vista until World of Warcraft REQUIRES it.

Thanks

[CtrlPhreak]

Now I know when I goto pirate the new latest version of windows I know which version to download to upgrade my XP Pro installation, Vista Ultimate. Yeah nothing to see here.

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

10 GOTO pirate
20 ???
30 Profit!

not a technical reason

[will_die]

Looking at the chart seems to indicate that it is not a technical reason for some of the in-place upgades.
XP MC is XP Pro, with some features such as domain join turned off, and with a a pre-loader for the large screen and some visual changes, and then the MSC sofware added on. If you go and install MSE the first that that is installed is a regular version of XP Pro. If you have software that installs on pro but not home it will install on MCE, if the turned off features are not needed.
So for all purposes MCE is XP pro with marketing for the home.
However in the table MCE is in-place upgradable to home premium and ultimate and XP Pro is upgradeable to business and ultimate.
So based on all above there is no reason XP Pro could not be in-place upgraded in Home Premium and MCE to business, the only reason would be that users would loose capabilties that thier previous versions had if they went that route.

HD space.

[marcovje]

I ran the check tool from microsoft, and the machine passed all test except for the HD test.

It seems it requires all required space to be already _free_ on the machine (so that increases the requirement with the size of your current installation), and on the primary partition.

Re:Let me be the first to say

[x2A]

Duh, you forgot the one about "which upgrade comes with DNF?"

Re:Too bad stupid M$ can't upgrade like LINUX!!!

[Synic]

I give your troll a 3 out of 5.

I don't even *try* to keep my settings.

[argent]

Mate, I'm a system administrator, 20 years supporting UNIX and DOS and Windows, and I take an install as an opportunity to clean out all the cruft. A clean reinstall, even of the same version, is a performance booster.

Of course the only things I keep on Windows are games... all the important stuff is on UNIX and Mac OS X, both of which maintain preferences in regular files.

I don't feel too confused

[Bill Dog]

From TFA, and essentially its thesis: "If you're confused, you probably won't be the only one."

It just doesn't seem that confusing (sorry if that makes the article less exciting). Here:

Vista            w/out Media Center   w/ Media Center
Home Versions:   Home Basic           Home Premium   w/out Tablet PC
Pro Versions:    Business             Ultimate       w/ Tablet PC

There, now with this plus the realization in the following paragraph, whether you have XP Home, Pro, Media Center, or Tablet PC, you know what upgrade will migrate your settings.

It makes sense that with the Home version of the prior OS you have your choice of making a lateral move or upgrading it to a Pro version, but the Pro version of the prior OS cannot really be downgraded to a Home version.

So for example it looks like XP Media Center was based off of XP Home, and XP Tablet PC was based off XP Pro.

Re:I don't feel too confused

[iainl]

Technically, XP MCE is based off Pro, but the Domain and IIS stuff is deliberately broken during the install process. Your matrix is essentially correct in terms of features, rather than architecture - you can't do an in-place upgrade to a version that has Domain networking (rather than just workgroups) to one that doesn't support it, in case it's in use and breaks things; similarly it won't let you upgrade the Media Centre to one without that feature.

DRM prevents 64 bit upgrade

[Myria]

The real reason XP 64 can't upgrade to Vista is because of DRM.

Vista 64 requires all drivers to be signed in order to load, no matter how much privilege you have or even if you own the computer. Microsoft says that this is to prevent rootkits, but that is total BS: a rootkit can get around this stuff in many ways. The real reason is DRM, the "Secure Audio Path".

By preventing anonymous people from writing stable kernel drivers, they're attempting to lock out DRM cracks. The easiest way to break Windows Media DRM is to make a fake sound card driver that simply dumps its input to disk. Microsoft, with their "Secure Audio Path", wants to make it so that DRM'd songs and movies are encrypted all the way from Microsoft to your speakers, so that nothing can tap into a digital stream. Since that's going to happen any time soon, they've decided to lock out unsigned drivers to prevent anonymous people (who must be anonymous because of the DMCA) from writing such drivers.

Microsoft has made several rather hidden statements that indicate that DRM is the real reason. If you run Vista 64 with "test-signed" drivers - what legitimate driver developers use to code in Vista 64 - the Windows Media DRM system disables itself, preventing playback of protected songs and movies. This was a single sentence in a long document on MSDN. I have the original document saved but it seems the URL to it has changed. I doubt Microsoft has deleted it, just moved it.

Microsoft knew that driver developers would be pissed, so they came up with a way to force them to make Vista 64 drivers. You cannot get your driver into Vista's Windows Update unless you provide both a 32 and 64 bit version.

You can't upgrade from XP 64 to Vista 64 simply because every single driver you have is incompatible and must first be replaced with drivers whose developers have paid the VeriSign Tax.

Melissa

Side notes for details

[Myria]

(This is separate to be like footnotes)

I implied that rootkit developers would still be able to make rootkits, but fake audio drivers couldn't be made. This sounds contradictory, since fake audio drivers can be made the same way as a rootkit. However, it's not technically infeasible, it's socially infeasible.

A rootkit is typically very secretive. It is rather uncommon for the run-of-the-mill trojan to have a kernel rootkit. Almost all trojans remain in user mode. Rootkits are a tool of experts, not script kiddies. Probably most rootkits out there are unknown.

A fake audio driver is public. There's nothing they intend to hide; they get credit when lots of people use their crack software.

The problem is that if you make a public crack of the signing system, it will be fixed the next second Tuesday, guaranteed. Unlike other security or "security" holes, Microsoft will be sure to fix anything you do very quickly since they're defending their DRM systems. Almost all users have automatic Windows Update now, so most likely your users will already be patched by then.

As for how you'd get around the driver signing, it is straightforward but annoying. User-mode programs running as Administrator or LocalSystem still have raw disk access write authority. You can open \Device\Harddisk0\Partition0 (NT's /dev/hda) and overwrite the boot sector, usurping the boot process from the MBR on. Call NtShutdownSystem to reboot, and your code runs with full authority. (Microsoft's goal is to eventually prevent this with hardware validation of the boot state; we call this TCPA.)

Melissa

Sorry, missing word

[Myria]

"Since that's going to happen any time soon"

should be:

"Since that's not going to happen any time soon"

Sorry...

Melissa

No problem!

[Cybrex]

It never will. You can always run WoW under OS X. ;-)

Re:No problem!

[teflaime]

Sorry, I'll switch to SuSe with Wine and OpenGL first. No crapple for me.

Re:No problem!

[Cybrex]

And yet your original comment implies that you will one day "upgrade" to Vista? Have fun with that.

Re:No problem!

[teflaime]

Only at work;).