Slashdot Mirror
Does the Windows Logo Mean Anything?
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."
> 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.
I thought it meant that the manufacturer had paid a fee to Microsoft.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
This is slashdot.
;-)
I want to know if it is Linux compatible..
Ducks
The truth shall set you free!
3.0 times = 6 6 6
SATAN LOGO PROGRAM!
Isn't Windows Approved a warning message?
Fight Spammers!
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.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Windows are something a burglar crawls throough and something that you jump out of when there is a fire.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Think of VISTA READY as HDTV-READY.
:)
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.
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.
All the toilets and urinals that I've relocated "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP" stickers onto seem to work fine. Just have use a drop of superglue under them to make sure they stay put.
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.
Many years ago (ouch, forty maybe?) I remember Ralph Nader making a cameo appearance on Rowan and Martin's Laugh In. He said, "I understand that General Motors has a new guarantee on their tires ... you're guaranteed four of them."
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Look at one of the references in the linked article: http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=393& pgno=1
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
"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.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
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.
The truth shall set you free!
I'll take the bait. I don't like replying to cowards but I will anyway
...thing... that just isn't possible
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.