WIN 7 Major USB Hardware Incompatibilities ?

  • Thread starter Trimble Bracegirdle
  • Start date
S

SC Tom

kony said:
Why not just call the police so the person holding a gun to
your head, forcing you to use Win7 instead of XP, is hauled
away?

Remember, you're the one who chooses what OS to use, based
on its merits. I agree MS should take greater measures to
support backwards compatibility with drivers but we can't
expect it since they have a monopoly position in the PC OS
market.
Instead of Microsoft being responsible for backwards compatibility with
outdated hardware, why shouldn't the hardware manufacturer be responsible
for providing updated drivers? It would certainly be cheaper in the long run
for each manufacturer to write new drivers than it would be for Microsoft to
insure it, but then, HP and the rest wouldn't be selling anything new if
their 20 year old printer has Windows 7 drivers. Are you willing to pay the
extra big bucks for Windows to be compatible with every piece of hardware
ever made? Can you even imagine what that cost would be? I can't. All I
could see would be "You can have the latest Windows version, Windows 2015,
for only $3,917 for the Home Starter Edition, with guaranteed backwards
compatibility through Windows3.11." Ain't gonna happen in our lifetimes :)
 
M

milt

Note that mike seems to be unable to type "MS" without using a dollar
sign. In my view, that totally corroborates your remark.
Yup, I noticed that as well, that was the obvious clue right there. As
if making money is a BAD thing!
 
D

Dave

mike said:
You're welcome to your bend-over-and-take-it attitude.
If XP could run my hardware device, there's no reason that W7 can't.
The code is already written. It works just fine.
M$ CHOSE to change things in a manner that caused a perfectly working
driver to quit working. I don't care WHY they did it. I want them
to continue to include the support they already had.

My C: drive is 9gigabytes of M$ bloat. Another bit of bloat for legacy
support wouldn't have killed them.

Yes, I'm sure there are all kinds of excuses. I don't want excuses.
I want those M$ geniuses to figger out how to make it work.
You can bet if it had been a priority, it would have happened.

This "throw away everything and start over" every few years has gotta
stop!!!

Dear valued customer,
Toyoter motor company announces an exciting new line of motor vehicles
chock full of features you'll never use. In order to support these
exciting new features, we had to change some parameters.

Our new vehicles are no longer compatible with garages built prior
to 1998.

Some parking spaces no longer work. You'll find that out when you
reach your destination and try to park.

In order to use toll roads, you'll need to purchase the optional
toll upgrade that works...mostly...

Our vehicles are no longer permitted in school zones.

Standard gasoline from your corner filling station will still
work in compatibility mode with significantly reduced fuel mileage.

If you have any child car seats or personal electronic items that were
used in your car, you will need to replace them. Legacy snow tires are no
longer supported.
Any towable trailers will need to be replaced.

Our ULTIMATE upgrade is required for trips greater than 100 miles.

Please remember that Toyoter motor company is the ONLY option available
to you. We trust you will continue to buy our products...because
you have no other choice.

Sorry for any inconvenience.
Your analogy as a joke is actually the truth. We now have to use spark plugs
that are more refined and expensive, no longer use a single coil that you
can scavenge from one vehicle to another (most of the time), can't use that
extra carburetor sitting on the shelf, can't use a cheater bar to tighten
bolts down anymore--have to use a torque wrench. Can't check for spark by
holding a plug wire a short distance from spark plug, and on and on and on
and on. That's one of the reasons salvage yards get old vehicles, at some
point in time the manufacturers stop producing parts for them and the only
source is aftermarket, demand is so low that sources dry up, price goes way
up and finally no-one wants to fix it, they sell it for salvage. If you
think about this you can draw your own parallel to MS and hardware
manufacturers and drivers.
Sadly, you have to do the same with your old hardware. You can gently lay it
next to some of those old monochrome (green and amber) monitors, dot-matrix
printers and Intel 286 CPU motherboards. Or, if it makes you feel better,
you can mutilate it first in any manner you choose except water boarding it
as that's not PC. (Pun intended)
Dave
 
B

Bogey Man

SC Tom said:
Instead of Microsoft being responsible for backwards compatibility with
outdated hardware, why shouldn't the hardware manufacturer be responsible
for providing updated drivers? It would certainly be cheaper in the long
run for each manufacturer to write new drivers than it would be for
Microsoft to insure it, but then, HP and the rest wouldn't be selling
anything new if their 20 year old printer has Windows 7 drivers. Are you
willing to pay the extra big bucks for Windows to be compatible with every
piece of hardware ever made? Can you even imagine what that cost would be?
I can't. All I could see would be "You can have the latest Windows
version, Windows 2015, for only $3,917 for the Home Starter Edition, with
guaranteed backwards compatibility through Windows3.11." Ain't gonna
happen in our lifetimes :)

Epson has a Windows 7 driver for that scanner on their site. So, what's the
problem?
 
S

SC Tom

Bogey Man said:
Epson has a Windows 7 driver for that scanner on their site. So, what's
the problem?
Not a problem for me; I don't own an Epson :)
 
A

Al Smith

SC said:
Not a problem for me; I don't own an Epson :)

Probably writing to me. The last time I looked, Epson had no
Windows 7 x64 driver for my Perfection 1260 scanner. Maybe they
have come up with one, but I doubt it. I'll take a look, though.

-Al-
 
K

kony

Instead of Microsoft being responsible for backwards compatibility with
outdated hardware, why shouldn't the hardware manufacturer be responsible
for providing updated drivers?
To some extent I agree that would be nice, but I propose
instead that MS should have a compatibility mode for drivers
so a newer OS at the very least universally supports any
driver that worked on the prior OS version.

I suggest this because inevitably there is more work to be
done in total by thousands of hardware manufacturers than a
single-point solution of backwards driver compatiblity.

Let's look at it a different way. Which would make more
sense, that a new car requires every tire company to make a
new tire for it, or the new car accepts standard rims and
tires if the owner doesn't want something exotic?



It would certainly be cheaper in the long run
for each manufacturer to write new drivers than it would be for Microsoft to
insure it,
No it certainly would not be cheaper. Remember, they
already had the code developed to use the existing drivers,
it was their choice to deviate and so it should be their
responsiblity to accept upon themselves the consequences.

As already mentioned, they don't because they can thrust the
cost onto others due to their monopoly position.
but then, HP and the rest wouldn't be selling anything new if
their 20 year old printer has Windows 7 drivers.
Yes they would, obviously even the workhorse printers of
years past don't typically last 20 years, even if you are
skilled at repair after 10 years you start to find that
replacement parts aren't being made, all those plastic and
rubber bits that hardened and became brittle and cracked,
have equally-old replacement parts.

Then there's upgrade for the sake of tech improvements.
That 8 year old scanner can't perform as well as a new one
in most cases, nor same age mouse, external hard drive, wifi
card, etc, etc.

Are you willing to pay the
extra big bucks for Windows to be compatible with every piece of hardware
ever made?
Actually, it costs more to make windows NON-compatible, they
already had the code for existing drivers and spent money
altering and/or replacing it.

Can you even imagine what that cost would be? I can't.
.... because you're taking a backwards approach. MS
definitely makes some improvements with each successive OS
version, but at the same time their interest is in people
buying new PCs with new components instead of pirating their
new OS to use with existing systems. I can't fault them for
wanting to prevent piracy, but I can fault them for causing
massive waste of hardware that ends up in landfills, the
energy and resources to make yet more hardware, and the
increased cost for everyone.

All I
could see would be "You can have the latest Windows version, Windows 2015,
for only $3,917 for the Home Starter Edition, with guaranteed backwards
compatibility through Windows3.11." Ain't gonna happen in our lifetimes :)
Then you aren't looking very hard. Random assumptions of
an extreme price approaching $4000 are obviously random
numbers pulled out of thin air that serve no reasonable
argument.
 
S

SC Tom

kony said:
To some extent I agree that would be nice, but I propose
instead that MS should have a compatibility mode for drivers
so a newer OS at the very least universally supports any
driver that worked on the prior OS version.
But then MS would have to have a cache of all the older drivers that they
had nothing to do with. MS didn't write them, HP, dell, etc. did.
I suggest this because inevitably there is more work to be
done in total by thousands of hardware manufacturers than a
single-point solution of backwards driver compatiblity.

Let's look at it a different way. Which would make more
sense, that a new car requires every tire company to make a
new tire for it, or the new car accepts standard rims and
tires if the owner doesn't want something exotic?





No it certainly would not be cheaper. Remember, they
already had the code developed to use the existing drivers,
it was their choice to deviate and so it should be their
responsiblity to accept upon themselves the consequences.
Who had the code developed? Not MS; it wasn't their hardware or drivers.

As already mentioned, they don't because they can thrust the
cost onto others due to their monopoly position.


Yes they would, obviously even the workhorse printers of
years past don't typically last 20 years, even if you are
skilled at repair after 10 years you start to find that
replacement parts aren't being made, all those plastic and
rubber bits that hardened and became brittle and cracked,
have equally-old replacement parts.

Then there's upgrade for the sake of tech improvements.
That 8 year old scanner can't perform as well as a new one
in most cases, nor same age mouse, external hard drive, wifi
card, etc, etc.



Actually, it costs more to make windows NON-compatible, they
already had the code for existing drivers and spent money
altering and/or replacing it.



... because you're taking a backwards approach. MS
definitely makes some improvements with each successive OS
version, but at the same time their interest is in people
buying new PCs with new components instead of pirating their
new OS to use with existing systems. I can't fault them for
wanting to prevent piracy, but I can fault them for causing
massive waste of hardware that ends up in landfills, the
energy and resources to make yet more hardware, and the
increased cost for everyone.



Then you aren't looking very hard. Random assumptions of
an extreme price approaching $4000 are obviously random
numbers pulled out of thin air that serve no reasonable
argument.
It's a "what if." It wasn't meant to be taken as fact.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

But then MS would have to have a cache of all the older drivers that they had
nothing to do with. MS didn't write them, HP, dell, etc. did.
Who had the code developed? Not MS; it wasn't their hardware or drivers.
It's a "what if." It wasn't meant to be taken as fact.
Absolutely. You even said it: "Can you even imagine what that cost
would be? I can't" before you introduce the numbers.

I am good at noticing that sort of thing. Mostly because I do it a lot,
and I also don't (intentionally) hide from others that I'm doing it.
 
K

kony

But then MS would have to have a cache of all the older drivers that they
had nothing to do with. MS didn't write them, HP, dell, etc. did.

No, it is ridiculous to think MS is somehow obligated to
maintain drivers. I'm completely against the idea they need
to provide any drivers at all... if somone can't get a
driver installed they aren't fit to set up a PC in the first
place, period.


Who had the code developed? Not MS; it wasn't their hardware or drivers.
Which leads back to the central idea, that if MS doesn't
control drivers, then their best position in a *competitive*
market would be not changing code so the vast, vast amount
of drivers that exist no longer work.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top